So it's similar to the other custom page 404 tests.
Note we're explicitely marking the page as a draft so it's more obvious
what's going on in the test.
We were testing what happens when users disable features in the admin
panel, so it makes sense to test what happens from the user's point of
view when trying to access a disabled feature: they see a page with the
test "Internal server error".
Whether we should responde with 500 Internal server error page or a 404
Not Found is up to debate; personally I find the latter more
appropriate.
Code based on the article "Changing Rails consider_all_requests_local in
RSpec fails" [1].
[1] http://atodorov.org/blog/2016/04/27/changing-rails-consider_all_requests_local-in-rspec-fails/
Tests are easier to read now. Besides, since we changed the inputs in
the admin section so they don't use jQuery but an HTML date field,
formatting with %d/%m/%Y might not work depending on the browser's
locale.
Some tests were failing depending on the window resolution due to the
datepicker making it impossible to click the "Filter" button. They were
also failing if using `clear: :backspace` to fill in those fields.
So we're focusing on a different field in order to hide the datepicker
and click the "Filter" button.
The line `fill_in "advanced_search_date_max", with: "wrong date"`
doesn't work because the jQuery UI datepicker prevents users from
entering that value.
Using `<a>` tags with no `href` means these elements cannot be activated
by keyboard users, so we're replacing them with buttons.
In the future we probably want to add more consistency so all toggle
buttons use the same code. We might also add styles depending on the
`aria-expanded` property.
Note we're absolutely positioning the link instead of the icon; that way
keyboard users will be able to focus on the icon. Until now, users would
focus on an empty link.
For the same reason, we couldn't use `click_link` with Capybara, since
it would fail to click an empty link. Now we can.
Co-authored-by: Javi Martín <javim@elretirao.net>
Since the `@ballot_referer` variable was only set in the lines
controller, it didn't work when we accessed the ballot page without
adding a line.
Note it still doesn't work if we access the ballot page directly by
entering the URL in the browser's address bar.
Even if we usually only access these pages for the current budget, that
might not always be the case, and now that we've unified budget landing
pages, there's no point in them pointing to the index anymore.
There was a big difference between the current budget and a specific
budget landing page. This didn't really make too much sense. Also, it
was not possible to know how a draft participatory budget will look
before it was published.
By unifying those two views now they will look quite similar and it
will be possible for administrators to preview any draft budget and to
know how the budget will look like before actually publishing it.
It was added because a test failed without turbolinks. However, writing
the test so it doesn't update the database at the same time the browser
is doing a request also solves the problem and makes the test more
robust.
Using the name instead of using the name and the price is IMHO more
consistent with the rest of the application, particularly for screen
reader users. Writing texts clicking those links is also easier.
I think the main reason why we used the price as part of the link was so
the clickable area was bigger. We can accomplish the same result with
CSS.
Now it's easier to change the investments filter. Previously we had to
go back to the budget index page, change the filter there, and then
select one heading.
Now the links to change the current filter in the budget index page
aren't needed anymore.
Since we were using an icon font with no text, screen readers were
announcing things like "Enabled, L", trying to read the icon generated
with CSS.
Using text and replacing it with CSS with an icon solves the problem.
We could also use aria-label, but I prefer using "Yes/No" so the text
can be shown/hidden with CSS. Also useful when using
`save_and_open_page` during tests, since the displayed page will not
have any CSS rules applied.
Out of several existing techniques to hide text [1], we're setting the
font size to 1px in combination with moving the content off-screen
because that way we can override it in the `::before` element.
Just moving the content off-screen has the inconvenient of the content
still being taken into account when calculating the text indentation.
And just using a 1px font would make a 1px-sized square appear when
selecting text, which could confuse users.
[1] https://webaim.org/techniques/css/invisiblecontent/
There were some issues using `.budget.expanded`, like a link having that
class which would force us to a `:not(.button)` selector or similar,
making the CSS more complex.
This makes the table easier to identify when writing tests and using
screen readers.
Since we do not render any other table captions anywhere else, we're
making the caption invisible so only screen reader users will be
affected by this change.
Even if the test checked all possibilities, it was hard to understand.
Using `have_table with_cols:` to test the order of the rows and testing
one phase is enabled and has a link to edit it es enough IMHO.
While trying to add the target="_blank" to this link I noticed that this attribute
no longer works in some places in the application, such as the terms and
conditions link in the sign_up page.
For the time being I think we can resolve it this way in this case and deal with
this issue in a separate PR.
In this page we will render a list of clickable Goals icons that will show their
targets and related local targets
Co-authored-by: Senen <senenrodero@gmail.com>
This component was rendered on different pages so there were no conflicts
with static id's.
Now in the SDG help page we are going to render them all at once, so we
convert the static identifiers to dynamic.
Previously the draft mode was a phase of the PB, but that had some
limitations.
Now the phase drafting disappears and therefore the PB can have the
status published or not published (in draft mode).
That will give more flexibility in order to navigate through the
different phases and see how it looks for administrators before
publishing the PB and everybody can see.
By default, the PB is always created in draft mode, so it gives you
the flexibility to adjust and modify anything before publishing it.
We were displaying the total number of notifications with a message "You
have N unread notifications", but were using the total number of
notifications instead of the unread ones.
Other than simplifying the view, we can write tests using `click_link`,
which makes the tests more robust. Clicking the `.icon-notification`
element was causing some tests to fail when defining a window height of
750 pixels in the `admin_budgets` branch.
Hopefully now it's a bit more obvious that SDGs can be selected by
clicking on them and that the field to select goals and the field to
select targets/goals are related (since they're now part of the same
fieldset).
We were using list items with the checkbox role. This is probably
confusing since list items have a listitem role, and so we were
basically using a list with no listitem.
We could add a `<span role="checkbox">` tag inside the list item, but
using real checkboxes is probably easier. We're also adding a test to
verify the checkboxes native behavior is compatible with our code.
Note we're using the "enter" key to toggle the "checked" status of the
SDG. This is probably not intuitive for screen reader users who might
try to submit the form using the "enter" key after selecting a goal.
However, the alternative would be even less intuitive for sighted
keyboard users, since for them these icons look like links or buttons
and they would accidentally submit the form when trying to select a
goal.
Since we haven't come up with a better interface yet, for now we're
following the principle of least damage; we consider submitting the form
against a user's will is less annoying than forcing users to move to a
different field before being able to submit the form.
Also note we can't write `check` in the tests because Capybara will try
to click the checkbox, which is hidden by the image in the label.
Using a button tag, it's possible for every user to "click" the element.
Besides, we don't need to call the `preventDefault` function, because
buttons with type "button" don't do anything by default.
