-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
Show template part selection modal when inserting header or footer variations #42581
Conversation
…riations that have no slug
Size Change: +18 B (0%) Total Size: 1.26 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
Yes, that appears to be happening for me, too, both with the quick inserter and copy + pasting a Footer template part. It looks like Overall, though, I quite like the idea of attempting to make it work from within the block's edit component, mostly so that it's a smaller code change. That way folks can evaluate whether or not opening a modal on insertion is something that feels good to use, before building an API around it? On the other hand, it's very cool that #42142 allows the insert modal to occur before the block is inserted, so cancelling out the modal can be treated as cancelling out the insertion. I think I like the idea of pursuing #42142 further if we feel confident that the API will be useful for other blocks, too. |
Testing this PR. What I see. Comparing to what I remember from the other PR. Clicking Header Clicking "Existing template parts" or "Patterns" both are inserted as a Header template. Clicking to insert a Template Part. To me this feel better organized compared to #42142. |
BTW, this is almost the same as that other PR in terms of user experience, there's only a subtle difference in that here the block is inserted first before choosing a pattern from the modal, in the other PR the block is inserted after choosing a pattern. I think you tested an older iteration of #42142, so that's why it's confusing. The main reason for this separate PR is to try different technical approaches and get feedback from other developers (the main reason why I keep PRs in 'draft' status).
That's a good question. There's already a 'Replace' option for switching an existing header, which I think should be used for this, but that's less prominent after #41437.
This flow hasn't changed btw. |
Closing this down as it seems the preference is for the other version. |
What?
This is an alternative version of #42142
Why?
This should help explore alternative solutions that don't require such big API changes.
How?
This PR differs from #42142 in that:
Pros:
Cons: