In T361878#9690768, @Catrope wrote:

Moving to Up Next since this blocks T358934, which the Community-Tech team is currently working on.

I think we should also consider whether we should pass all HTML attributes (except class and style) to the <input> element, as TextInput does (using the useSplitAttributes composable). But we can look into that later, for now I think we should add a name prop to Checkbox and ToggleSwitch for consistency with Radio.

Moving to Up Next since this blocks T358934, which the Community-Tech team is currently working on.

Update: now that the checkboxes are wrapped individual Field components, they have a 16px margin between them (currently 24px in MW core, but that's about to be reduced to 16px by the next Codex release). Normally, checkbox groups in Codex have a 12px margin between them. We should consider whether we want to override the styles on the block form in this case (or in CodexHTMLForm more generally for adjacent checkbox fields) to reduce the margin from 16px to 12px.

I no longer think we should do this, since:

• The submit button has type=submit and has flags, both of which are unsupported for addButtons()
• The cancel button is not a button at all, it's a link
• The reset button is going to be removed (T361032)

I suggest a modified version of Anne's first option: call getAncestors() to get the information about the ancestors and format that the way we want for the header (we should be able to use similar code to what getAncestorLinks() uses to build the link text); and then also call getAncestorLinks() separately, to get the links we need for the breadcrumbs.

In T360343#9665324, @Jdrewniak wrote:

hi @Catrope, the following sounds good:
✅ Less variables and CSS variables in separate files
✅ A dedicated night mode mixin
✅ Only includes tokens required for night mode

Happy to hear that!

There is now a dark mode build in Codex, but because T360341 isn't done yet, it contains dummy values for now. We also changed the file names around:

@Jdrewniak The patches attached to this task generate output that looks like this:

That comment was about vertically stacked fields, which is why I wasn't sure it was relevant. To see the login form thing that I'm talking about, compare the current appearance of the login form (with the legacy 15px spacing) with this demo of what the login form would look like if we removed the legacy styles and allowed Codex's default field styles (with 24px spacing) to apply. I brought it up mostly because, if there's any discussion of reevaluating the 24px spacing and perhaps changing it to 16px, then that might affect what we do with the login form and how carefully we roll it out (for example, 16px is so close to the existing 15px that we wouldn't expect anyone to notice, whereas 24px would be a visible change to a prominent form).

This list is huge, so I think that we should eventually make this an epic with subtasks, and prioritize the list. Some of these extensions only use Codex for a couple of things, or only use CSS-only components; hopefully those will be easier to test.

In case it's relevant here: the spacing between fields on the login form is currently 15px. I have a temporary override in place to keep that the same for now, but if we remove that and let Codex's default behavior take over, then the spacing between each of the fields on the login form would be 24px, which does look pretty spacious.

@bwang I don't believe Minerva uses TypeaheadSearch, does it? Or does it use TahS styles for the CSS-only version of its search bar? Either way, to answer your question, you should list the components that are used in Minerva; you don't have to worry about technical dependencies (e.g. SearchInput needs the styles for TextInput) because those are added in automatically. The codex-search-styles module contains only TypeaheadSearch and its dependencies (which include SearchInput and Button), but you might not need all of those; conversely, it does not contain Radio and Message, but depending on what Minerva uses you might need those. Searching Minerva for the cdx- prefix I only see buttons, but I don't know if there's stuff coming from somewhere else that Minerva might need to style.

In T323492#9626931, @CCiufo-WMF wrote:

@Catrope we've removed the compat mode now -- can this be closed?