Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support 'Autoplay' and 'Loop' in Audio Block 'Playback Controls' #7322

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jun 27, 2018

Conversation

danielbachhuber
Copy link
Member

@danielbachhuber danielbachhuber commented Jun 15, 2018

Description

Introduces support for 'Autoplay' and 'Loop' to the Audio Block:

image

Notably, autoplay and loop are only applied on the frontend, not within Gutenberg.

See https://wordpress.slack.com/archives/C02QB2JS7/p1529950740000305 for discussion of boolean attribute handling.

See #6581

How has this been tested?

  1. Upload a MP3 file to the Media Library.
  2. Create a new Audio Block from the MP3 file.
  3. Check the "Autoplay" checkbox, flip to HTML mode, and observe the inclusion of the autoplay attribute.
  4. Manually edit <audio> HTML to include a loop attribute.
  5. Flip back to Visual mode and observe the checked state of the Loop checkbox.
  6. Publish the post and view its frontend state to observe the application of the autoplay and loop attributes.

Screenshots

New UI:

image

GIF of the testing instructions:

audiopost

Classic Editor:

image

Types of changes

Enhancement to existing feature.

Checklist:

  • My code is tested.
  • My code follows the WordPress code style.
  • My code follows the accessibility standards.
  • My code has proper inline documentation.

@danielbachhuber
Copy link
Member Author

danielbachhuber commented Jun 15, 2018

The bug I've run into:

blockcrash

Specifically, if I add loop as an attribute to <audio> in HTML mode, I still get the "Modified Externally" error.

I think this might be an issue with https://github.com/aduth/hpq

@danielbachhuber
Copy link
Member Author

I think this might be an issue with https://github.com/aduth/hpq

Yep aduth/hpq#3

@gziolo gziolo added [Feature] Blocks Overall functionality of blocks [Type] Bug An existing feature does not function as intended [Status] In Progress Tracking issues with work in progress labels Jun 18, 2018
@danielbachhuber danielbachhuber force-pushed the 6581-permit-autoplay-loop branch 2 times, most recently from 2867e25 to 6bf528f Compare June 25, 2018 19:30
@danielbachhuber danielbachhuber added this to the 3.2 milestone Jun 25, 2018
@danielbachhuber danielbachhuber changed the title [WIP] Support 'Autoplay' and 'Loop' in Audio Block 'Playback Controls' Support 'Autoplay' and 'Loop' in Audio Block 'Playback Controls' Jun 25, 2018
@danielbachhuber danielbachhuber added Needs Design Feedback Needs general design feedback. and removed [Status] In Progress Tracking issues with work in progress labels Jun 25, 2018
@danielbachhuber danielbachhuber requested a review from a team June 25, 2018 20:13
@danielbachhuber
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks to @aduth's help, I sorted out the issue with parsing attributes.

Updated description to include testing instructions. Note: this only includes autoplay and loop, not preload. I'll handle that in a follow-on PR.

Flagging Needs Design Feedback for the inclusion of new checkboxes.

Copy link
Member

@tofumatt tofumatt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approach here is good, but I have some cleanup and DRY requests.

Let me know when it's ready for another review and I'll have a look.

@@ -98,7 +98,11 @@ export function matcherFromSource( sourceConfig ) {
* @return {*} Attribute value.
*/
export function parseWithAttributeSchema( innerHTML, attributeSchema ) {
return hpqParse( innerHTML, matcherFromSource( attributeSchema ) );
const attrValue = hpqParse( innerHTML, matcherFromSource( attributeSchema ) );
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can this be attributeValue instead? Abbr r sad 😉

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed in 7469f3efad200d2b835500d3f1e10b3a748bbafd

@@ -98,7 +98,11 @@ export function matcherFromSource( sourceConfig ) {
* @return {*} Attribute value.
*/
export function parseWithAttributeSchema( innerHTML, attributeSchema ) {
return hpqParse( innerHTML, matcherFromSource( attributeSchema ) );
const attrValue = hpqParse( innerHTML, matcherFromSource( attributeSchema ) );
if ( 'attribute' === attributeSchema.source && 'boolean' === attributeSchema.type ) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know this is the WordPress style but I see both variable first and constant first in Gutenberg. While my preference is variable first, I just wish we were consistent.

That's not specific to this commit though really. I was just working on a file earlier that had the same issue 😆. We just need some better rules is all.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also, I get why this is, but because the function's docstring says we return a value here and this is the only behaviour where we don't rely on hpqParse, can we document what's happening here?

// HTML boolean attributes set to `true` won't have a value set, so return true
// if their value is `''`.

🤷‍♂️

It will just make the next person reading this not have to wonder, for a few seconds as I did, what this does 😄

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added a note in db1103158cba6b4fb6f6f8800a48b78ab9ae968b

@@ -105,6 +105,45 @@ describe( 'block parser', () => {
);
expect( value ).toBe( 'chicken' );
} );

it( 'should return the matcher\'s string attribute value', () => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seeing this has motivated me to work on #7366 after reviewing this 😆

@@ -53,6 +60,14 @@ class AudioEdit extends Component {
this.setState( { editing: false } );
};

const onToggleAutoplay = ( newVal ) => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we use newValue here instead of newVal?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Handled in 275ef72d3b349410d62d4c4880330cb977607932

setAttributes( { autoplay: newVal } );
};

const onToggleLoop = ( newVal ) => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we use newValue here instead of newVal?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Handled in 275ef72d3b349410d62d4c4880330cb977607932

setAttributes( { autoplay: newVal } );
};

const onToggleLoop = ( newVal ) => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems like it'd be nicer to have:

toggleAttribute = ( attribute ) => ( newValue ) => {
  setAttributes( { [ attribute ]: newValue } );
}

and then have onChange={ toggleAttribute( 'loop' ) }

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And also: why is this function set as a constant inside every render() call? This should be a component method.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Refactored in 275ef72d3b349410d62d4c4880330cb977607932

@danielbachhuber danielbachhuber requested a review from tofumatt June 27, 2018 00:01
Copy link
Member

@tofumatt tofumatt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tested locally and looks good to me! 🚢

<figure className={ className }>
<audio controls="controls" src={ src } />
{ ( ( caption && caption.length ) || !! isSelected ) && (
<RichText
tagName="figcaption"
placeholder={ __( 'Write caption…' ) }
value={ caption }
onChange={ ( value ) => setAttributes( { caption: value } ) }
onChange={ this.toggleAttribute( 'caption' ) }
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice! 👍

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh, wait, it just occurs to me that this isn't a toggle. I hastily read through this part of the diff.

I don't think this should be using the method toggleAttribute because it makes it read like this is a binary setting control (eg a checkbox or toggle) when it's actually setting the value of a text field.

If you want to keep it a single function I'd choose a more representative function name like setAttributeWithComponentValue but that's pretty verbose.

I'd just make a new function that explicitly sets the caption here… I think it's good to move away from the inline function, but I don't think it's good to use this name for this event handler.

@karmatosed karmatosed self-requested a review June 27, 2018 16:52
Copy link
Member

@karmatosed karmatosed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As with gallery and other blocks we use switches over checkboxes, can you change those here too please?

@karmatosed karmatosed removed the Needs Design Feedback Needs general design feedback. label Jun 27, 2018
@tofumatt
Copy link
Member

Feel free to flag me for another review once these are moved to switches. 😄

@danielbachhuber danielbachhuber force-pushed the 6581-permit-autoplay-loop branch from 275ef72 to a7d03bc Compare June 27, 2018 17:21
@danielbachhuber
Copy link
Member Author

@tofumatt @karmatosed Incorporate the toggle UI:

image

Copy link
Member

@tofumatt tofumatt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Everything else looks great but I just noticed an issue with RichText using the toggle function. I left a note about it; after that good to go.

<figure className={ className }>
<audio controls="controls" src={ src } />
{ ( ( caption && caption.length ) || !! isSelected ) && (
<RichText
tagName="figcaption"
placeholder={ __( 'Write caption…' ) }
value={ caption }
onChange={ ( value ) => setAttributes( { caption: value } ) }
onChange={ this.toggleAttribute( 'caption' ) }
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh, wait, it just occurs to me that this isn't a toggle. I hastily read through this part of the diff.

I don't think this should be using the method toggleAttribute because it makes it read like this is a binary setting control (eg a checkbox or toggle) when it's actually setting the value of a text field.

If you want to keep it a single function I'd choose a more representative function name like setAttributeWithComponentValue but that's pretty verbose.

I'd just make a new function that explicitly sets the caption here… I think it's good to move away from the inline function, but I don't think it's good to use this name for this event handler.

@danielbachhuber
Copy link
Member Author

@tofumatt I reverted back to an inline function d679123

@tofumatt
Copy link
Member

(While in general I dislike inline functions it's more readable than before, we have plenty so removing them is a better thing to do en-masse, and it was like that when you got here, so approved!)

I've dismissed @karmatosed's review because the change was made.

@mtias
Copy link
Member

mtias commented Jul 5, 2018

Thanks for the work here!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
[Feature] Blocks Overall functionality of blocks [Type] Bug An existing feature does not function as intended
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants