Inconsistent specification of sim-specific features in package.json

[pixelzoom]

I'm seeing this pattern in package.json files:

    "simFeatures": {
      "supportsSound": true,
      "supportsInteractiveDescription": true
    },
    "supportsOutputJS": true,
    "supportsDynamicLocale": true

I'm not sure about "supportsOutputJS", but the other 3 properties are definitely sim-specific features. Why are some under "simFeatures", while others (like "supportsDynamicLocale") are not?

I stumbled across this problem while trying to add "supportsDynamicLocale": true to a package.json. I added it to "simFeatures", it didn't work, and I spent time figuring out why.

@jonathanolson you recently added "supportsDynamicLocale". Should it be under "simFeatures"?

[pixelzoom]

"colorProfiles" also seems sim-specific, and is not under "simFeatures".

Adding to Dev Meeting project board.

[pixelzoom]

It looks like @zepumph renamed “features” to “simFeatures”, but I can’t tell who originally added it. I’m guessing it was someone on the a11y team, since it seems to be mostly (all?) a11y features. There are other properties, like “colorProfiles”, that are clearly sim-specific features and not under “simFeatures”. Adding to the Dev Meeting project board.

[pixelzoom]

I'm not 100% certain, but it looks like @zepumph added "simFeatures" (originally named "features") to package.json for #1031.

@zepumph what was the purpose of adding the "simFeatures" property? Should other properties be relocated to be consistent? Or should features under "simFeatures" be moved up a level, and "simFeatures" deleted?

[zepumph]

My opinion would be to have the runtime-specific features of the simulation itself be housed in simFeatures. There are an ever growing number, and it has simplified the package files in my opinion. @jonathanolson can we move supportsDynamicLocale into simFeatures?

supportsOutputJS has nothing to do with the features of the runtime, but instead about the source code. It is not a good candidate for nesting in simFeatures.

[pixelzoom]

What other properties should be moved into simFeatures? colorProfiles? Anything else?

[zepumph]

Yes, let's move colorProfiles as well. I glanced through many package.json and didn't see any others that seemed like they should be moved.

[jonathanolson]

can we move supportsDynamicLocale into simFeatures?

Yes definitely! I was unaware of simFeatures. colorProfiles seems like it works also.

[samreid]

This commit had at least one problem, seen in phetsims/density@07a3118?diff=split

The JSON came out like:

      "phet": {
        "requirejsNamespace": "DENSITY",
        "phetLibs": [
          "density-buoyancy-common",
          "mobius"
        ],
          "../sherpa/lib/poly-decomp-0.3.0.js",
        "preload": [
          "../sherpa/lib/p2-0.7.1.js",
          "../sherpa/lib/three-r104.js"
        ],

and the unbuilt sim fails with:

Uncaught SyntaxError: Unexpected string (at density_en.html?brand=phet&ea&debugger:40:11)

I'm not sure if other sims are affected.

[samreid]

I ran grunt update for density, and it seemed to help.

[zepumph]

voicing, colorProfile and dynamicLocale have been moved into simFeatures. I think we are ready to close. @pixelzoom do things look good to you?

[pixelzoom]

Confirmed by inspecting geometric-options/package.json. Closing.