Problem/Motivation
Field types provide a description in their annotation. However, they are not used anywhere in the UI. Since they aren't used anywhere, they don't really provide any additional information for anyone, code comments could be used to provide information to developers. If and when we wanted to add field type descriptions to the UI, we could add a description then, and there would be an obvious context that it shows up in to tailor the descriptions for.
Proposed resolution
?
Remaining tasks
?
User interface changes
?
API changes
?
Data model changes
?
Comments
Comment #2
swentel CreditAttribution: swentel as a volunteer commentedJust a throught: if they are not used or exposed, maybe we shouldn't even wrap them in in @translation ?
Comment #3
tstoecklerWell, IIRC the idea was that some "better field UI" module could come around and then actually expose those. But since that doesn't actually exist, I think this is a problem. Can't we just simply drop the descriptions?
Comment #4
tstoecklerIn other words I don't think still having the string around but not translated is of much use, because then if it does ever get used in a UI, then people will complain that it's not translated and until then it will just lay around useless like it does now. That's why I think it makes sense to just drop them alltogether. If we ever re-introduce them, we can totally do that in a BC-compatible way IMO.
Comment #5
swentel CreditAttribution: swentel as a volunteer commentedI'm ok with removing them, they don't really make sense if you don't know the context and they are fairly technical anyway. Even if they were exposed, it wouldn't really be helpful anyway I'm afraid.
Comment #18
catchRecategorising as a task and updating the issue summary. Removing the key seems sensible, since as mentioned it can always be added back when there's a use-case for it.