Now that we have such a convenient lil outfit viewer component we built
for the item page preview, it's easy peasy to drop it in here too! And
it's all nice and lightweight, since in this case it's basically just.
image tags, with some supporting enhancements.
Anyway, this page has no actual useful styles of its own yet. Gonna
make it look nice and such!
The silly motivation is that I wanted to remove `.prettierignore`,
which just exists to omit that one folder from `npm run format`. But it
also seems like this is the standard place to put them—a standard
created long after we first set this up lol
Ahh right, when you indent stuff underneath a tag in HAML, it does the
same indented form in the output HTML, which adds whitespace that
creates a problem for how we're doing this list.
Before this change, the "Engulfed in Flames Effect" item showed below
the preview: `Occupies: Background Item , Lower Foreground Item`, with
an extra space before the comma.
After this change, it now shows
`Occupies: Background Item, Lower Foreground Item`, as intended.
No more of this loading everything into `application.css`! I'm
arbitrarily starting here because that's where I've been playing
lately, but this is part of a larger effort to move toward a more
straightforward CSS architecture (and away from Sass even?)
I skipped this for a bit because I couldn't think of a simple way to
adapt this behavior to a web component + vanilla CSS setting, but then
I thought of CSS variables, and sat down and cranked this out!
Oh right, forgot about this lol!
The specific effect on Impress 2020 where the button label expands is,
kinda hard to implement in normal CSS/JS, and so I'm not in the mood
and I'm settling for the `title` attribute lol
Oh right, I need the error indicator to be part of a container that
also contains the outfit viewer, to appear below it!
I was motivated because I realized I forgot the Customize More button
so now I'm building it lol
We add a new `use_responsive_design` helper, for pages to opt into this
new CSS—mostly just because like… it's *worse* to apply these styles
for pages that don't expect it 😅
And then, I fix up a couple things on the item page (including in the
general items layout) to match!
I'm doing this because the species face picker layout is going to want
some responsive awareness, and I want to be doing that from the start!
Here, I remember the trick I learned when building the outfit viewer:
web components are great for making sure stuff stays initialized well
in a Turbo environment!
The problem was, after submitting the form and getting a new preview
loaded via Turbo, the part where we remove `inert` would get undone.
Additionally, this script only loads *once* per session, so if you
Turbo-nav to a different item then that part of the page never ran.
Instead, we use web components to remove the attributes on mount, then
again if they're ever reapplied by Idiomorph.
We mark the options as `inert` and `aria-hidden` while the JS is still
loading—and if the `noscript` tag tells us it's never coming, it covers
up the picker with a brief explainer!
The basics are working great! There's a few known missing things though:
- Add reasonable noscript behavior
- Disable options where there's no valid appearance
- Lay it out actually _good_, instead of just images dumped there
Adapting what the Impress 2020 UI does, but in Ruby instead!
I feel like this is case is really starting to show the power of doing
this stuff in Rails instead of via an API… we can *really* take
advantage of our models and our handy idioms at all points. This is
just so much less *code* than this feature takes in Node + GraphQL +
React.
The most notable thing here is that we keep the movie iframes running!
So if you're trying different pets for an animated item, the animation
keeps going while the new pet layers load alongside it.
This is also nice for like, the species/color picker form, so we're not
taking away input elements from people who depend on e.g. keyboard
focus.
Instead of doing all this listening to Turbo events etc to know when
outfit layers might have changed, making it a custom element and wiring
in the behavior to its actual lifecycle makes it always Just Work!
This is a cute thing that I think sets us up for other stuff down the
line: move more of the outfit appearance logic into the `Outfit` class!
Now, we set up the item page with a temporary instance of `Outfit`,
then ask for its `visible_layers`.
Still missing restricted-zones logic and such, that's next!
Nice, gotta say, this is a pretty neat way of making things feel more
app-y! There's some missing pieces here about like, loading state etc,
but the vibes are pretty good, and the implementation was dead-easy!
Just stripping out the big React component, and having Rails output it!
There's a lot of work rn in extracting the Impress 2020 dependency from
the `wardrobe-2020` React app, and I'm just curious to see if we can
simplify it at all by pulling this stuff *way* back to basics, and
deleting the item page part of `wardrobe-2020` altogether.
In this draft, we regress a lot of functionality: it just shows the
item on a Blue Acara, with no ability to change it! I'm gonna play with
putting more of that back in.
I also haven't actually removed any of the item page React code; I just
stopped calling it. That can be a cleanup for another time, once we're
confident in this experiment!
First one, Turbo reasonably yelled at us in the JS console that we
should put its script tag in the `head` rather than the `body`, because
it re-executes scripts in the `body` and we don't want to spin up Turbo
multiple times!
I also removed some scripts that aren't relevant anymore, fixed a bug
in `outfits/new.js` where failing to load a donation pet would cause
the preview thing to not work when you type (I think this might've
already been an issue?), reworked `item_header.js` to just run once in
the `head`, and split scripts into `:javascripts` (run once in `head`)
vs `:javascripts_body` (run every page load in `body`).
I *think* what I'm observing is that:
1. The zone restrictions are different between these items.
2. The zone restrictions *change* when reloading the page sometimes. (I
assume from remodeling?)
3. The items look very buggy on many pets, because many appearances
seem to expect different zone restrictions than the item actually
has.
I think what this means is:
1. TNT has finally unbound restricted zones from the item level, and
allowed different appearances to have different restrictions. Neat!
2. The API still serves it the same way, as a field on the item.
So I think this means we need to update our schema to reflect the fact
that an item's `zones_restrict` field isn't *really* a property of the
item; it's a property of the combination of the item and the current
body ID.
My gut take here is that maybe this means it's time for the Large
Refactor that I've kinda been interested in for a while, but been
avoiding because of Impress 2020 compatibility issues: instead of a
`body_id` field on assets, and having them directly belong to items,
make an `ItemAppearance` record (closer to how 2020's GQL API modeled
it, I was looking ahead to this possibility!) that's keyed on item and
body ID, and assets belong to *that*.
Then, we could move the zones restriction field onto the
`ItemAppearance` record instead. And then it doesn't really matter to
us how TNT models it internally; whatever we saw is what we use.
(Again, I looked ahead to this in the 2020 app, and tried to use the
`restrictedZones` field on `ItemAppearance` when possible—even though
it secretly just reads directly from the `Item`!)
…but that's a pretty big departure from how things are modeled now, and
isn't something we can just throw together—especially coordinating it
across both apps. I was getting close to being able to shut off 2020
from a *front-facing* perspective (but still keeping a lot of the GQL
endpoints open for the wardrobe-2020 frontend), but I don't think we're
very close to being able to try to target turning off 2020's *backend*
as a prereq to this; or at least, if we do, we should expect that to
take a while. (Counting now, there's still 9 GQL queries—not as many as
I expected tbh, but still quite a few.)
So idk how to sequence this! But for now, let's put out a warning, and
start setting expectations.
It was a bit tricky to figure out the right API for this, since I'm
looking ahead to the possibility of splitting these across multiple
pages with more detail, like we do in DTI 2020.
What I like about this API is that the caller gets to apply, or not
apply, whatever scopes they want to the underlying hanger set (like
`includes` or `order`), without violating the usual syntax by e.g.
passing it as a parameter to a method.
I guess I deleted this a while ago without really noticing… I think I'd
at some point like to replace this with like, the DTI 2020 improved
table layout thing, but I figured this would be pretty quick to throw
in and make the page not feel like a pain to use lmao
Oh yeah, a long-standing limitation. Good thing we're better at stuff
now!
This is also probably the real cause of the weird number of slight
discrepancies between main DTI and DTI 2020 when I eyeballed stuff lol
oh, well, that and the missing default-lists. A bit messy!
There was a time when I used an old proxy server to try to fix mixed
content issues, and I eventually removed it but never took the tendrils
out from the code.
We probably _should_ figure out how to secure these URLs! But until
then, we may as well simplify the code.
Eyyy tasty! There were some issues with conflicting styles with the main app, but I think we got it!
Scoping Chakra's CSS reset was a big deal to not accidentally overwrite the app's own styles lol, and we had to solve a specificity problem for that, thanks Aria for the :where tip!! <3
Idk this one might actually be a bit of a pain to load? But I'd want to optimize it differently anyway, and there's overhauls we're already planning to do here.
