Removes references to the vite template
- [x] `documentation` — Changes to the documentation only[^2]
### Release Notes
- changes the doc site so it no longer references the site template
This PR refactors our menu systems and provides an interface to hide or
replace individual user interface elements.
# Background
Previously, we've had two types of overrides:
- "schema" overrides that would allow insertion or replacement of items
in the different menus
- "component" overrides that would replace components in the editor's
user interface
This PR is an attempt to unify the two and to provide for additional
cases where the "schema-based" user interface had begun to break down.
# Approach
This PR makes no attempt to change the `actions` or `tools`
overrides—the current system seems to be correct for those because they
are not reactive. The challenge with the other ui schemas is that they
_are_ reactive, and thus the overrides both need to a) be fed in from
outside of the editor as props, and b) react to changes from the editor,
which is an impossible situation.
The new approach is to use React to declare menu items. (Surprise!)
```tsx
function CustomHelpMenuContent() {
return (
<>
<DefaultHelpMenuContent />
<TldrawUiMenuGroup id="custom stuff">
<TldrawUiMenuItem
id="about"
label="Like my posts"
icon="external-link"
readonlyOk
onSelect={() => {
window.open('https://x.com/tldraw', '_blank')
}}
/>
</TldrawUiMenuGroup>
</>
)
}
const components: TLComponents = {
HelpMenuContent: CustomHelpMenuContent,
}
export default function CustomHelpMenuContentExample() {
return (
<div className="tldraw__editor">
<Tldraw components={components} />
</div>
)
}
```
We use a `components` prop with the combined editor and ui components.
- [ ] Create a "layout" component?
- [ ] Make UI components more isolated? If possible, they shouldn't
depend on styles outside of themselves, so that they can be used in
other layouts. Maybe we wait on this because I'm feeling a slippery
slope toward presumptions about configurability.
- [ ] OTOH maybe we go hard and consider these things as separate
components, even packages, with their own interfaces for customizability
/ configurability, just go all the way with it, and see what that looks
like.
# Pros
Top line: you can customize tldraw's user interface in a MUCH more
granular / powerful way than before.
It solves a case where menu items could not be made stateful from
outside of the editor context, and provides the option to do things in
the menus that we couldn't allow previously with the "schema-based"
approach.
It also may (who knows) be more performant because we can locate the
state inside of the components for individual buttons and groups,
instead of all at the top level above the "schema". Because items /
groups decide their own state, we don't have to have big checks on how
many items are selected, or whether we have a flippable state. Items and
groups themselves are allowed to re-build as part of the regular React
lifecycle. Menus aren't constantly being rebuilt, if that were ever an
issue.
Menu items can be shared between different menu types. We'll are
sometimes able to re-use items between, for example, the menu and the
context menu and the actions menu.
Our overrides no longer mutate anything, so there's less weird searching
and finding.
# Cons
This approach can make customization menu contents significantly more
complex, as an end user would need to re-declare most of a menu in order
to make any change to it. Luckily a user can add things to the top or
bottom of the context menu fairly easily. (And who knows, folks may
actually want to do deep customization, and this allows for it.)
It's more code. We are shipping more react components, basically one for
each menu item / group.
Currently this PR does not export the subcomponents, i.e. menu items. If
we do want to export these, then heaven help us, it's going to be a
_lot_ of exports.
# Progress
- [x] Context menu
- [x] Main menu
- [x] Zoom menu
- [x] Help menu
- [x] Actions menu
- [x] Keyboard shortcuts menu
- [x] Quick actions in main menu? (new)
- [x] Helper buttons? (new)
- [x] Debug Menu
And potentially
- [x] Toolbar
- [x] Style menu
- [ ] Share zone
- [x] Navigation zone
- [ ] Other zones
### Change Type
- [x] `major` — Breaking change
### Test Plan
1. use the context menu
2. use the custom context menu example
3. use cursor chat in the context menu
- [x] Unit Tests
- [ ] End to end tests
### Release Notes
- Add a brief release note for your PR here.
Uses sandpack in all places so we can do richer code snippets.
Also, drive-by fix to fix sidebar logic.
Also, drive-by fix to hide keyboard hint (Cmd+K) for search on mobile.
### Change Type
- [x] `documentation` — Changes to the documentation only[^2]
### Release Notes
- Docs: reworks code snippets
Following on from #2686, this PR replaces the introduction page with a
Quick Start guide.
Next Steps:
- Better UX around the code blocks, throughout the site. A copy button
would be great.
- Collapsible extra info on the release version and rendering an inline
component
- Maybe remove the embed
- [x] `documentation` — Changes to the documentation only[^2]
### Release Notes
- Add a quick start guide
---------
Co-authored-by: Mime Čuvalo <mimecuvalo@gmail.com>
This PR starts putting in place the high-level changes we want to make
to the docs site.
- It makes separate sections for Reference and Examples and Community.
- Gets rid of the secondary sidebar and integrates it into the main
sidebar.
- Groups the reference articles by type.
- Pulls in the examples alongside code and a live playground so people
don't have to visit examples.tldraw.com separately.
<img width="1458" alt="Screenshot 2024-01-30 at 09 43 46"
src="https://github.com/tldraw/tldraw/assets/469604/4f5aa339-3a69-4d9b-9b9f-dfdddea623e8">
Again, this is the top-level changes and there's more to be done for the
next PR(s):
- create quick start page
- clean up installation page
- add accordion to Examples page prbly
- put fun stuff in header (from footer)
- landing page
- something for landing page of API
- search cmd-k and border
- cleanup _sidebarReferenceContentLinks
- external links _blank
- address potential skew issue with code examples
- have a link to other examples (next.js, etc.)
### Change Type
- [x] `documentation` — Changes to the documentation only[^2]
### Test Plan
1. Make sure examples work!
### Release Notes
- Rework our docs site to pull together the examples app and reference
section more cohesively.
---------
Co-authored-by: Taha <98838967+Taha-Hassan-Git@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Steve Ruiz <steveruizok@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mitja Bezenšek <mitja.bezensek@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: alex <alex@dytry.ch>
Co-authored-by: Lu Wilson <l2wilson94@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Dan Groshev <git@dgroshev.com>
This PR replaces the stackblitz embed with a simple codesandbox embed on
our docs site.
### Change Type
- [ ] `patch` — Bug fix
- [ ] `minor` — New feature
- [ ] `major` — Breaking change
- [ ] `dependencies` — Changes to package dependencies[^1]
- [ x] `documentation` — Changes to the documentation only[^2]
- [ ] `tests` — Changes to any test code only[^2]
- [ ] `internal` — Any other changes that don't affect the published
package[^2]
- [ ] I don't know
This PR adds the docs app back into the tldraw monorepo.
## Deploying
We'll want to update our deploy script to update the SOURCE_SHA to the
newest release sha... and then deploy the docs pulling api.json files
from that release. We _could_ update the docs on every push to main, but
we don't have to unless something has changed. Right now there's no
automated deployments from this repo.
## Side effects
To make this one work, I needed to update the lock file. This might be
ok (new year new lock file), and everything builds as expected, though
we may want to spend some time with our scripts to be sure that things
are all good.
I also updated our prettier installation, which decided to add trailing
commas to every generic type. Which is, I suppose, [correct
behavior](https://github.com/prettier/prettier-vscode/issues/955)? But
that caused diffs in every file, which is unfortunate.
### Change Type
- [x] `internal` — Any other changes that don't affect the published
package[^2]
This PR removes the docs site (again) which suggests that git may have
been confused about new content.
### Change Type
- [x] `documentation` — Changes to the documentation only
This PR changes the structure of the docs site's sidebar.
I think this signposts more clearly what the different pages are for.
And it also paves the way for some work I want to do on
expanding+refining the Editor docs.
This PR also simplifies URL for all sidebar links.
It's a bit scrappy, but I think it feels simple enough to work with, and
easy-enough to change in the future.
> But hey! I've been doing this a couple times recently. Maybe we should
refactor? Or maybe we should keep going with what we've got and focus on
getting these docs *done*.
### Change Type
- [x] `documentation` — Changes to the documentation only[^2]
[^1]: publishes a `patch` release, for devDependencies use `internal`
[^2]: will not publish a new version
### Test Plan
1. Check that all the sidebar links go to where you expect.
2. Check that old URLs redirect to the right pages, eg: `/docs/usage`
should go to the usage page.
### Release Notes
- Documentation: Restructured the sidebar for clarity.
