Page MenuHomePhabricator

Ensure talk page comments that are not signed are visible in apps
Open, HighPublic

Description

1. Background

The Android team is improving talk pages and order to implement changes like threading and exposing meta data, we must transition to a new API. The API we planned to use is the new DiscussionTools API. The API became available last week but has a few improvements that need to be made. The major change that is necessary for the Android team to migrate to the API is ensuring all talk page comments are visible even if they do not have a proper signature. Currently, if a comment doesn't have a proper signature it does not show up at all for the apps but will show up on Desktop and Mobile Web.


2. User stories

  • As an app user, I want to see the talk page comment I responded to on desktop even though it was not properly signed, so that I can follow the conversation across platforms.


4.0. Test Instructions

QA to check if an item that does not have a signature shows up in the Android app.

Event Timeline

JTannerWMF created this task.
ppelberg edited projects, added Editing-team (Kanban Board); removed Editing-team.

Note: today, @DLynch is going to investigate what work and decisions would be involved in implementing what this task is seeking and if there are ways to incrementally deliver it.

My understanding is that the outcome of various discussions is that we've committed to providing the contents of sections that don't contain any comments.

I have a WIP patch from when we were talking about this earlier, which represents approximately what we're planning on doing, and I'm going to clean that patch up and get it mergeable. Basically, when we notice a section that contains no detected-comments at all, we're going to add an othercontent field to its heading (alongside the existing replies field), which is going to contain a big blob of HTML representing whatever-is-in-there. It'll be up to the apps to output that in some way they feel is appropriate. (I'm going to see whether it's quick-and-easy to make sure I provide the coffee-roll section as well in a similar way via a placeholder heading, but I gather that's not a thing we've committed to.)

@DLynch Thanks! I've checked out the patch, and it's definitely in line with what we're looking for. (And if we're able to get the coffee-roll section, that would be a great bonus.)

Change 774573 had a related patch set uploaded (by DLynch; author: DLynch):

[mediawiki/extensions/DiscussionTools@master] PageInfo threaditemshtml: For empty headings, include their non-reply content

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/774573

Change 792299 had a related patch set uploaded (by DLynch; author: DLynch):

[mediawiki/extensions/DiscussionTools@master] PageInfo threaditemshtml: include content before the first heading

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/792299

Change 774573 merged by jenkins-bot:

[mediawiki/extensions/DiscussionTools@master] PageInfo threaditemshtml: For empty headings, include their non-reply content

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/774573

Change 792299 merged by jenkins-bot:

[mediawiki/extensions/DiscussionTools@master] PageInfo threaditemshtml: include content before the first heading

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/792299

matmarex added a project: Skipped QA.
matmarex subscribed.

I think this is done from our side? I'm not sure what are the next steps here.

I think this is done from our side? I'm not sure what are the next steps here.

Regarding the next step(s), @JTannerWMF are you okay with me untagging the Editing Team and y'all Resolving this ticket once you've had the opportunity to verify the patch(es) are working in the way(s) you expect them to?

Hi all,

Hopefully this is the right place since this ticket isn't resolved yet. I had a couple of questions about the current API:

Question 1

We're building up our fetcher for this, and I could use some confirmation on what's expected in the response (seems like the API docs do not include that for us, unless I'm missing it somewhere). Can I get a thumbs up on if these notes looks right?

Item

keytypealways exists?always non-null?additional notes
typeStringtruetruealways "heading or "comment"
levelIntegertruetrue
idStringtruefalse
htmlStringtruetruecan be empty string
headingLevelIntegerfalsefalseonly in response for "heading" types, could still be null
repliesArray of Itemstruetruecould be empty array
nameStringfalsefalseonly in response for "heading" types, could still be null
othercontentStringfalsetrue
placeholderHeadingBoolfalse?unsure of when this returns, I can't trigger it anymore

Question 2

Is placeholderHeading still used, or did othercontent replace it? I haven't been able to see it in a response yet.

Q1
We just changed id and name for headers so that they'll always be non-null. Current placeholder headers where they were null will now have them as h-.

Otherwise that looks accurate.

Q2: Ed removed placeholderHeading in this patch, it seems. It's 100% redundant with headingLevel == null, though.

@DLynch: Removing task assignee as this open task has been assigned for more than two years - see the email sent to all task assignees on 2024-04-15.
Please assign this task to yourself again if you still realistically [plan to] work on this task - it would be welcome! :)
If this task has been resolved in the meantime, or should not be worked on by anybody ("declined"), please update its task status via "Add Action… 🡒 Change Status".
Also see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Bug_management/Assignee_cleanup for tips how to best manage your individual work in Phabricator. Thanks!

Is there anything left to do here? @JTannerWMF or @Tsevener, do you know?

Based on the comment in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T304856#7918353, we are receiving and displaying coffee rolls and sections without signatures now. This looks good to me. @JTannerWMF Can you close this if you agree?

  NODES
Note 6
Project 8
Verify 1