-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Power test export refactoring (#607)
- Loading branch information
Showing
1 changed file
with
86 additions
and
31 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
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
2559c92
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not use the help_text filter for the field names, as per the detail page? I know it's a bit anti-pattern but I did it like that because the specific wording of all parts of the H&S paperwork is quite important, and ideally needs to match exactly at all times.
2559c92
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I did consider this and try this. The main problem is the slight variations between the help text in HTML vs. RML. For example as far as I could see
<small>
doesn't exist in RML (<sub>
does but I've opted for a styled<para>
) and so it actually worsened the formatting and clarity.I did make sure everything matches both the input form and the RAMS for working to BS7909 (there aren't any wording changes other than section titles really). In another project I use Palantir's review bot to assign reviewers based on certain path changes, seems like asking a power supervisor or someone to review changes to files like this is the best way to ensure consistency and RAMS adherence.
I can have another look at the help_text filter but my guess is the subtle differences between RML and HTML make it not as useful.
2559c92
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My solution for ra_print was just to feed it through striptags, but I can see how that might not be ideal - I'm just wary of having more than one place changes need to be made, given our history with keeping paperwork up to date and stuff.
This seems like it would be a good thing to implement either way.