Page MenuHomePhabricator

⛄ Build a summary mode Remarkup engine for constrained text areas
Open, LowPublic


We have several use cases where we don't was "full HTML" Remarkup, and just some "basic HTML" Remarkup:

  • Conpherence Summaries
  • Hovercards
  • Task Titles
  • Project descriptions in typeahead search results
  • Stuff like config values and instructions, where "Amazon S3" should never reference Space S3.

It would be nice to link T123 and such in commit message summaries in history views in Diffusion. I believe this is blocked by having better support for summary/header/feed markup (e.g., no image macros or other giant stuff, just links and basic styles).

Related Objects

Event Timeline

epriestley added a project: Diffusion.
epriestley added a subscriber: epriestley.
epriestley edited this Maniphest Task.
epriestley closed subtask Restricted Maniphest Task as Resolved.Nov 18 2014, 3:15 AM
chad changed the visibility from "All Users" to "Public (No Login Required)".Jul 3 2015, 5:22 AM
chad renamed this task from Apply summary/header remarkup to commit message summaries to Build a summary mode Remarkup engine for constrained text areas.Sep 11 2015, 5:45 PM
chad updated the task description. (Show Details)

I think it's probably correct for task titles, Phriction document titles, etc., to not be Remarkup.

If we wanted to support the Phriction icon use case (which I don't think is necessarily unreasonable as a general CSM-esque / user control feature) I think just building it into Phriction properly makes the most sense, so you'd pick an icon for each document.

Particularly, these titles things are frequently linked, so we can't let you put links into them without everything turning into a huge mess. This doesn't seem useful to me anyway. And we can't link other objects either, and embedding them likely doesn't make any sense. Most other rules won't work, either. So I think that would just leave us with bold, italics, and icons?

It doesn't seem valuable to me to support these styles in object titles. It would add a lot of complexity (e.g., APIs need to deal with it, search engine stuff needs to deal with it, mail needs to deal with it, summarizing becomes more difficult, rendering list views gets way slower / more complex). None of this is impossible, but the value of putting bold text in your task title seems near-zero to me. (On the icon front, you can technically already use emoji, just not the shorthand aliases for them.)

The original Diffusion use case was dealing with a more narrow situation: some users write commit messages like this:

Fixes #1234

That is, their entire commit message is just a reference to a bug/task/ticket, and they have no summary or context.

Other users do something like this:

[JIRA-123] Fix a bug blah blah

Summary: etc etc

That is, they write real commit messages but always put the name of the relevant task in the summary.

In Diffusion, in the history and browse interfaces, we render this text as an unlinked description with no special handling:

Screen Shot 2015-09-25 at 8.41.53 AM.png (1×1 px, 391 KB)

For users looking at this interface who also write very brief commit messages or always put task links in summaries, this could clearly be improved by replacing "Fixes JIRA-123" with "Fixes JIRA-123".

But I think this situation is unique to Diffusion, and we never render any other object titles unlinked as far as I know (except on the detail pages themselves).

I think Hovercards and Conpherence summaries are clearer cases for a summary-mode, although this mode might be different from the Diffusion mode. It's probably OK to have a codeblock or blockquote in a hovercard, but it doesn't make sense in a Diffusion view.

epriestley renamed this task from Build a summary mode Remarkup engine for constrained text areas to ⛄ Build a summary mode Remarkup engine for constrained text areas.Sep 25 2015, 3:47 PM

I frequently use backticks in task/revision titles and would like for those to be rendered as monoscoped text, but this is a relatively small use case.