notable layout change is that the text content will now try to center itself, and we push the buttons off to the right. we also needed to tweak the layout code a bit to get the buttons to feel centered with the top two lines, bc centering against the full block just feels wrong, they want to be top-y in terms of positioning, but still feel centered-y in terms of visual balance
Honestly I don't think this is the long-term home for the Modeling link, I think it'll become a homepage-only link as we add more modules there. But I wanted to get it out of the way!
Fading the whole preview to a black overlay for the loading state was feeling aggressive, especially since loading delay wasn't working correctly!
In this change, I fix loading delay, and I add a nice subtle "corner" variant for outfit preview spinners :)
Here, we add loading skeletons to lots of individual elements, instead of doing a whole item placeholder skeleton. That helps when coming from pages where we have some data, like name and thumbnail, but things is isNc are still missing.
It looks nice, but also particularly means we can handle the loading for the preview separately, get that started faster and iterate better on it in dev!
Initially the spinner was only used in OutfitPreview, where the background was always pretty dark. Now that we use it in more general contexts, we need a light/dark distinction!
Also went and standardized out the `size` props
Here, we extract a lean WardrobePageLayout component, so that we can bundle it into the main app as a loading state for WardrobePage.
This means that clicking Start from the homepage will, instead of flashing the screen to white while WardrobePage loads, show the correctly-sized black/white page layout instead.
I think the Chakra upgrades made these overrides stop working? added !important so that they happen again!
The regression meant the homepage looked worse, always having the selects fade in :/
I think I got all up in my head about direct queries for this one, because of a previous implementation I had in mind, and I forgot that I could just query species and color from the cache by reference without breaking out of the API provided to the cache function!
I also learned in here that I _can_ look up things from the root by doing `readField("allSpecies", {__ref: "ROOT_QUERY"})`, which I struggled to figure out my previous time. I couldn't figure out how to read an uncached field with arguments (I couldn't quite figure out how to build a proper FieldNode, and passing the string form seemed to provide `null` to the `species` cache field reader), but it's probably doable!
(the permissioning happens on the backend in the prev change! but yeah we send the auth token in the headers, so the backend knows who you are and whether to show you private data)
(also it is just owned items not in any list!)
Essentially I want the center-y visual balance around the image, and the name and _one_ line of tags. If there are extra tags, I want that to go down on its own, rather than bringing down the image+buttons to center against them.
The single-line-of-tags case is the most common, and I think it makes things feel more consistent for all the items to stick to that basic layout, while trying to keep that layout feeling center-y
I was getting annoyed by how, when you're using search, trying on an item will remove conflicting stuff, and then if you decide you don't like what you tried the old stuff _doesn't come back_
As of this change, it does! When you start a new search, we save the outfit state, and then whenever you change the items we ask "hey can these old ones safely be re-worn again?" and re-wear them if so.
On the search panel, not all items have the remove button, and it's confusing to have the other buttons be in inconsistent positions!
Move the Remove button to the left side of the list, so that everything else is positioned the same regardless
Okay, we handle the new pages correctly! Still some weird bugs when you send requests near each other? Probably wise to migrate to Apollo's new way of doing this
This is just an implementation thing, but I realized we can just insert the Zone data into the initial Apollo cache, instead of doing weird field definitions
I _do_ still want the @client tags in the queries though, to tell them not to make server requests at all
This was a subtle little thing for a while! If you switch species/color, such that an item doesn't fit the pet anymore, we used to just hide it. Now, we show it in a list, so that you can understand what went wrong, and have the option to remove it.
This was bothering me, I'm surprised and pleased by how easy it seems it was to fix? :)
The strategy is just, look for groups that are provably redundant, and filter them out.
I hope it's correct! It's definitely cozier. Kyrii Mage items are good tests, they have a lot of interesting zones!
I figured that we'd want simpler UI in the ItemsPanel when possible… but now that we've got it pretty simple and comfy, I think the consistency is better
These are nice! :)
The `hideSimpleZones` option I'm not sure about yet, but I figure that:
1. For a new user just doing simple outfits, I feel like the double data on the items page just looks silly, so I want to streamline for that
2. But I _do_ want to let the user think about zone complexity when things _are_ multi-zone.
I did also consider just hiding the zone badge for the header you're under, but I figured the consistency of having the item and its badges look the same in all the places in the list was more important.
This is in preparation for hiding bio zone restrictions but showing item zone restrictions!
I also refactor the build-cached-data script substantially, to run GraphQL against the server instead of a custom query.
okay so the PetAppearance restrictions are stored on the asset, because that's how they're defined on Neopets.com too
but I think that's a confusing API, so here I define `PetAppearance.restrictedZones`, which just maps over the layers and aggregates the zones server-side, same as we would have done on the client
I think that's much easier to understand than having layer contain a field, but having to know that item restrictions _don't_ work that way, you know?
