Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Change error message in editor #3629

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 9, 2017
Merged

Conversation

wxyxinyu
Copy link
Contributor

@wxyxinyu wxyxinyu commented Jul 9, 2017

This changes the error message in the editor to clarify where the author should add feedback in the case where the default rule has no feedback.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Jul 9, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #3629 into develop will decrease coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #3629      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    44.85%   44.84%   -0.01%     
===========================================
  Files          257      257              
  Lines        19871    19873       +2     
  Branches      3131     3132       +1     
===========================================
  Hits          8913     8913              
- Misses       10958    10960       +2
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
extensions/interactions/baseValidator.js 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
...ev/head/pages/exploration_editor/EditorServices.js 35.13% <0%> (-0.07%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update f904ee9...d6c646a. Read the comment docs.

'Please add feedback for the user if they are to return to the ' +
'same state again.')
'Please add feedback for the user in the [All other answers] ' +
'rule if they are to return to the same state again.')
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I suggest removing "if they are to return to the same state again" as currently it sounds like a conditional - i.e. the editor has to determine whether the user would return to the same state again, and if so fix things.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Changed it, please take a look again.

Copy link
Member

@jacobdavis11 jacobdavis11 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants