Render non-editable preview of template part when user does not have capability to edit template part #60326
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…rights to edit template part
fabiankaegy
added
[Type] Enhancement
fabiankaegy
requested review from
Mamaduka,
youknowriad,
noisysocks,
talldan and
gziolo
fabiankaegy
changed the title
fabiankaegy
changed the title
4 tasks
|
Size Change: +282 B (0%) Total Size: 1.72 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
youknowriad
reviewed
Apr 1, 2024
| } ) { | ||
| useBlockEditingMode( 'disabled' ); | ||
|
|
||
| const { content, editedBlocks } = useSelect( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the difference between all the code that is here and the useEntityBlockEditor hook?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually I missed something here. The difference should be that the getEntityRecord call here uses context: 'view' which the useEntityBlockEditor hook does not support
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we add a "readonly" option to the useEntityBlockEditor hook to address this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@youknowriad updated this in 352aa9e. This removes a lot of the complexity because after testing a bit more it seems we can pretty much omit edits for user roles that cannot edit the template.
This also fixes the request to use the view context as I mentioned
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's better but I still wonder whether we should just reuse useEntityBlockEditor with an option? Wdyt?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm yeah, I hear your concerns. I'll have to see whether I can update the useEntityBlockEditor hook without adding too much complexity. It's not obvious to me how to best approach it right now but will experiment a bit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay I'm having a hard time modifying the useEntityBlockEditor hook. We can't call any of the hooks there conditionally but want to avoid doing a bunch of the work in case of the readonly mode.
@youknowriad you let me know how you want to handle this. Do you want to push something to this branch? Do you want me to merge as is and then simplify it later? Open to whatever you think makes the most sense
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's merge as is. It doesn't introduce any API and address a need. We can consider the refactoring later if needed.
|
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message. To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
youknowriad
reviewed
Apr 1, 2024
| tagName: TagName, | ||
| blockProps, | ||
| } ) { | ||
| useBlockEditingMode( 'disabled' ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we replace this with templateLock: 'all' ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I tried that first. But template lock all only prevents moving / deleting / inserting blocks. Not changing the attributes of any of the blocks that are already in there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wish we could make another "lock" level rather than a hook like that but that's fine for now (declarative means less bugs in general)
…iew context there are no edits
youknowriad
approved these changes
Apr 1, 2024
fabiankaegy
deleted the
feature/add-view-only-mode-to-template-part-block
branch
4 tasks
cbravobernal
pushed a commit
to garridinsi/gutenberg
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 9, 2024
…capability to edit template part (WordPress#60326) Co-authored-by: fabiankaegy <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: youknowriad <[email protected]>
Mamaduka
reviewed
Jul 16, 2024
Comment on lines
+129
to
+135
| return { | ||
| canViewTemplatePart: | ||
| select( coreStore ).canUser( 'read', 'templates' ) ?? false, | ||
| canEditTemplatePart: | ||
| select( coreStore ).canUser( 'create', 'templates' ) ?? | ||
| false, | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@fabiankaegy, I've got a similar question here. Should this check if a user can read/edit this particular template part, or is it just a general check for templates?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What?
Part of #60316. Building on top of: #60317 and #58301
Adds a new non-editable mode to the template part block that renders the block list as disabled and non-editable.
Why?
This mode will be needed to render a preview of a template part for users that can view a template but not edit it.
How?
Adding a user capability check before rendering the editable template part preview and for users that cannot edit it rendering an alternative locked down mode.
Testing Instructions
Apply the following patch locally:
Open the site editor and see that the template parts like the header are rendering fully but are not editable/selectable.