2 Commits

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Matt Wang	ad56241fc3	Fix back_to_top not displaying when no other footer variables are set (#1461) ... This is the minimum necessary change to make `back_to_top` work when there is no custom footer, last edit timestamp, or GitHub edit link. Two immediate thoughts. First, we have a pair of variables: `back_to_top` and `back_to_top_text`. In my opinion, this seems a bit unnecessary; we could just use a `back_to_top`, and treat any non-`nil`/`false` value as the text. We could make this backwards compatible (i.e. support but deprecate `back_to_top_text`). Any thoughts here? Secondly, some of these conditions are weak: a251382b7a/_includes/components/footer.html (L7-L9) Here, this conditional *should* also check for `back_to_top_text`, and presumably, this should "bubble up" to the overall `if` statement on line 4 (similar things for the `gh_*` variables - the line 4 condition only checks for `gh_edit_link`). Is this a reasonable concern/take? If so, I can approach this some time (either in this PR, in another PR, etc.). --- After we decide the correct behaviour of `back_to_top`, I'll add documentation to the "Configuration" section! Separately, @pdmosses mentioned: > The obvious fix is to always render the footer when `site.back_to_top` is set. However, it would improve the usability of the back-to-top feature if individual pages could override the site setting (to suppress the link on some short pages, or to show it on some long pages). Happy to do that too - for organizational purposes, I'll punt that to another PR (that I can merge into the same release). --- Fixes #1443.	2025-01-06 07:30:31 +00:00
Matt Wang	2495d3e6bb	refactor: modularize site components (#1058) ... Hi everyone, this is a large refactoring PR that looks to **modularize site components** following the discussion in #959. At the top-level, it: - moves icons, the sidebar, header (navbar, search, aux links), footer, and mermaid components of the `default` layout into their own `_includes` - creates a new `minimal` layout that does not render the header or sidebar as a proof-of-concept for the composability of components - documents all existing and new layouts (including vendor code) in the "Customization" section An important goal of this PR is for it to be **just code motion and flexibility**: there should be **zero impact** on the average end user that only consumes the `default` theme. The next few sections go in-depth on each of the listed changes. ### new components The `default` layout contains a "list" of all relevant components. Importantly, some of these components have sub-components: - the header is split into the search bar, custom code, and aux links - the icons include imports different icon components, some of which are conditionally imported by feature guards There are also candidates for future splits and joins: - the sidebar could be split into navigation, collections, external link, and header/footer code - the "search footer" could be joined with other search code, which would make it easier to "include search" in one go; *however, this is a markup change* - @kevinlin1 has pointed out that there is some leakage between the sidebar (which computes parents/grandparents) and the breadcrumbs (which needs them to render). He's graciously added a bandaid fix to `minimal` (which does not render the sidebar). However, in the long term, we should either: - calculate this in a parent and pass the information to both components - change how this works entirely (which may happen with multi-level navigation) @pdmosses has done a great job outlining this and more in his [Modular Layouts test site](https://pdmosses.github.io/modular-layouts/docs/main/). ### minimal layout Based on @kevinlin1's use-case in just-the-class (see: his [Winter 2023 CSE 373 site](https://courses.cs.washington.edu/courses/cse373/23wi/)), we've created a first-class `minimal` layout that does not render the sidebar or header. In a [comment](https://github.com/just-the-docs/just-the-docs/pull/1058#discussion_r1057015039), Kevin has indicated that we can re-add the search bar in the minimal layout; however, it seems like this would be a code change. I think we should punt this to a future issue/PR. @pdmosses has also discussed the confusion of `minimal` as a layout and its meaning in inheritance. I've added a note in documentation to clarify the (lack of) inheritance relationship. ### documentation I've written documentation in the "Customization" page / [Custom layouts and includes](https://deploy-preview-1058--just-the-docs.netlify.app/docs/customization/#custom-layouts-and-includes) section explaining: - generally, that we use includes/layouts (and pointing to docs) - the `default` layout and its constituent components (with a warning about name collisions) - creating alternative layouts with `minimal` as an example - the inheritance chain of layouts and the vendor layouts that we consume I've also created (and linked to) a [minimal layout test](https://deploy-preview-1058--just-the-docs.netlify.app/docs/minimal-test/) that is currently a copy of the markdown kitchen sink but with the minimal layout. I think there's room to improve this in the future. ### future work I think there's a lot we can do. Let me break this into various sections. Potential follow-ups before `v0.4.0`: - re-including search in `minimal` (anticipating a minor code change) - fixing the leakage of parent/grandparent information between the sidebar and breadcrumbs (anticipating no end-user code change, but good to evaluate separately and discuss) - heavily document this in the migration guide (#1059) and in our RC4 release docs - improve semantic markup for components (ex `main`, `nav`) Related work in later minor versions: - split up components into smaller components - allow users to easily customize new layouts using frontmatter (see @kevinlin1's [comment in #959](https://github.com/just-the-docs/just-the-docs/issues/959#issuecomment-1249755249)) Related work for `v1.0` (i.e. a major breaking change): - rename and better categorize existing includes - standardizing the "custom" includes - moving other components to the `components/` folder (ex `head`, `nav`) - potentially: less confusing naming for various components - potentially separate the search and header as components, so that they are completely independent Tangentially related work: - more flexible grid (see @JPrevost's [comment in this PR thread](https://github.com/just-the-docs/just-the-docs/pull/1058#issuecomment-1363314610)) - a formal [feature model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_model) of JTD, documenting feature dependence (see @pdmosses's [comment in this PR thread](https://github.com/just-the-docs/just-the-docs/pull/1058#issuecomment-1365414023)) - better annotate new features (motivated by writing these docs) - we should add "New" to new features :) - we should note when a feature was introduced (I think this is a core part of most software documentation) - we should annotate things that are "Advanced" in so far as the average Just the Docs user will not use them / they require significant Jekyll knowledge --- Closes #959.	2023-01-07 16:08:45 -08:00