Add SDG view with related content #4292
Merged
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
javierm
force-pushed
the
sdg_management
branch
from
fcc530e
to
1a8687b
Compare
javierm
force-pushed
the
sdg_view
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b0c59a4
to
1fb9150
Compare
javierm
force-pushed
the
sdg_management
branch
2 times, most recently
from
2e35558
to
74962ef
Compare
javierm
force-pushed
the
sdg_view
branch
7 times, most recently
from
522660a
to
249bd9d
Compare
Note we're using the code instead of the ID to get the goal in the URL. IMHO this is what most people would expect; visiting a URL with a "7" takes you to SDG number 7, and not to the one with "7" as a database ID. In order to avoid tests (either automated tests or manual tests) passing by coincidence due to the goal ID and the goal code being the same, I'm shuffling the codes before entering them in the databse. I've tried using `resolve` in the routes so the code is automatically taken into account, but it doesn't work since `resolve` cannot be used inside a namespace, and here we're within the `sdg` namespace.
The same way it's done by the United Nations.
Using the `:only-child` selector we can adjust widths with CSS and don't have to rely on methods calculating which features are available.
Using data-equalizer is always hard due to the JavaScript it uses, while the flex layout works all the time.
They were all following the same format. Note we need to group the `see_all` translation keys together (the same way it's done with the `most_active` keys) so we don't have an unused translation warning. We're also moving the "see all" link in processes outside the feed content; the same way it's done in debates and proposals and removing unnecessary classes in the processes feed: the column class is causing the processes not to be aligned with the debates above them, and the margin bottom is not needed because the margin of the footer is already enough.
We were having some style issues when adding the processes feed to the goal view because of this lack of separation. We're using a <section> tag so it's clear where the <header> tag belongs to.
We were jumping from h1 to h3 and some of these sections (cards and processes) had h3 tags inside them. My best guess is we were using h3 so the titles were smaller. So I'm adding a CSS mixin to easily use a font size of a different heading tag.
Note the link to see all processes does not filter by goal because the legislation section does not have any search filters.
This is a scenario which will likely take place for at least some of the goals.
taitus
approved these changes
Dec 28, 2020
Merged
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.
Objectives
Visual changes