All paragraphs should have class="govuk-body", or be otherwise
custom-styled. This commit adds some extra checks to our test fixture
that looks for paragraphs that don’t have any styling. Our test coverage
is pretty good, so this should check almost all pages, and prevent
regressions.
I’ve done this in such a way that it can be extended for other elements
(e.g. links) in the future.
We had 7 classes in _grids.scss named `.column-...` which were being
used to give a certain column width. These worked by using `@include
grid column()`, which is now deprecated.
`.column-whole` and `.column-three-quarters` can be removed and replaced
with `govuk-grid-column-full` and `govuk-grid-column-three-quarters`
respectively. The other column classes don't have a direct replacment in
GOV.UK Frontend. To get round this, we overwrite the `$govuk-grid-width`
SASS map in `extensions.scss` to add in extra widths, then use this with
the `govuk-grid-column` mixin to create new classes in for our custom
widths in `_grids.scss`
Includes:
- turning off :visited styles to match existing
design
- swapping heading classes used to make links bold
for the GOVUK Frontend bold override class
- adding visually hidden text to some links to
make them work when isolated from their context
We may need to revisit whether some links, such as
those for documentation and features, may benefit
from having some indication that their target has
been visited.
Includes:
- turning off :visited styles to match existing
design
- swapping heading classes used to make links bold
for the GOVUK Frontend bold override class
- adding visually hidden text to some links to
make them work when isolated from their context
We may need to revisit whether some links, such as
those for documentation and features, may benefit
from having some indication that their target has
been visited.
This replaces the buttons that aren't part of a macro and that we don't
need to write additional styles for with their govuk-frontend equivalent.
There were some links that were styled to look like buttons, so these
have also been replaced with the new govuk-frontend macro.
There was one button on the `choose-account.html` template that was in a
section of code that was never reached - this has been deleted.
service contact blocks contain new lines - and jinja2 normally ignores
newlines (as in it keeps them as new lines) - but we need to turn them
into `<br>` tags so that we can show the formatting that the user has
added. We were previously just doing `{{ block | nl2br | safe }}`. nl2br
turns the new lines into `<br>` tags, and then `safe` tells jinja that
it doesn't need to escape the html.
this causes issues if the user adds `<script>alert(1)</script>` to their
contact block (or some other evil xss hack), where that will get let
through due to the safe flag
To solve this, use `Markup(html='escape')` to sanitise any html, and
then convert new lines to <br>.
bump utils
another xss
HighlightTags was bad because:
- we haven’t called placeholders ‘tags’ for a long time
- it also does resizing of the `<textarea>`, not just highlighting the
placeholders
In some cases it’s not appropriate for teams to have GOV.UK branding.
But they all start with it by default, if we can’t make a better guess.
We should be more explicit about this to reduce the number of teams
sending emails with the wrong branding.
We get a few tickets at the moment where people are asking for the
branding they already have.
We think that playing back the name of the branding on this page should
reduce how often that happens.
Letting people input a bit of free text should reduce the amount of back
and forth we have to do over support tickets when setting up someone’s
branding.
If something else is the only option then we don’t show the radio button
at all and have just the free text input on the page (not behind a
progressive disclosure).
Users who work in local government can’t have GOV.UK branding on their
emails. And only those working for Companies House (for example) can
request the Companies House branding.
This commit adds:
- new choices of email branding, which offer the name of the branding,
rather than the style
- logic to filter this list to only the applicable options, based on
what we know about the user, service and organisation
This is a change from the previous approach which put the onus on users
to figure out the style of branding they wanted, when we might already
know that a lot of the options weren’t available to them, or would be
inconsistent with the branding of other services in their organisation.
We want GPs to be able to accept the agreement online. But at the moment
they don’t get automatically assigned to organisations. So we need to
let them enter the agreement accepting journey even if they don’t have
an organisation set up.
