fix(workspace): explain practice-progress limits with accessible tooltips - #1226
seonghobae wants to merge 23 commits into
Conversation
|
👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request. When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down. I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job! For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs. For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task. |
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Advanced Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review. 📝 WalkthroughWalkthrough
Changes연습 진행 버튼 툴팁
Priority: ⬇️ Low Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes Change: Feature Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to No actionable regression remains from this tooltip migration. The change is ready to merge after normal checks. 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
@cwl-noema-review Please review exact head |
요청하신 대로, |
|
@opencode-agent review exact head |
코드 리뷰 봇의 요청에 따라 |
… add UI Interaction Tests
|
Queued @cwl-noema-review for PR #1226 at head |
|
Queued @opencode-agent for PR #1226 at head |
… add UI Interaction Tests
… add UI Interaction Tests
… add UI Interaction Tests
|
Queued @cwl-noema-review for PR #1226 at head |
Buyer-visible outcome
Practice Progress keeps the +/- controls keyboard-focusable at the 0% and 100% boundaries, preserves the action as each button's accessible name, explains the boundary as a separate description, and gives both buttons plus the slider interaction envelope a 44 CSS px target while keeping the visual slider track thin. The shared Base UI tooltip is supplementary; assistive technology receives the limit reason through persistent
aria-describedbycontent.This is a Workspace/UI accessibility slice only. It does not change practice-progress persistence, rehearsal decision logic, MIR, Active Player, or shared identity contracts.
Exact current identity
develop@314ddeae7b775a4957594b599358c8255617eb2e.palette-tooltips-3326814127791485331.d839aa9cbdd29735f5e2c8849658c4e975d1c7fe.d2cf8db5762c4aa583026aeb758b27a3722e67fb; the five-commit descendant history is preserved andd2cf8db... → d839aa9...has zero file delta.PracticeProgress.tsx, focused test, EN locale, KO locale.Every source movement invalidates predecessor checks/reviews. Only the unchanged exact current head may satisfy the verification gate.
Accessibility contract retained
aria-disabledplus click guards;aria-disabledis not treated as behavioral disabling by itself.Decrease progress/Increase progress).aria-describedbypoints to a localized persistent reason (practiceProgressAtMin/practiceProgressAtMax).size-11; the slider pointer envelope usesh-11; the visible track remainsh-3; the native range input fills the full interaction envelope.WCAG 2.2 SC 2.5.8 defines the Level-AA minimum target size and SC 2.5.5 defines the 44×44 CSS px enhanced target objective used by this control. Source/jsdom class assertions are not promoted to browser geometry evidence.
Intervening-delta repair — 2026-09-19
After
d2cf8db..., four ordinary descendants (dd6679e...throughcc45a298...) again replaced the stronger boundary contract with the generated tooltip-only implementation. Fresh compare showed exactly four semantic regressions:aria-describedbyreasons from both boundary buttons;size-11) back to 32 px (size-8);h-11) back to the 12 px visual track and removed the focused target-size regression.The added
TooltipProviderwrappers in the intervening tests did not add a distinct product contract:Tooltipalready owns a provider boundary and the stronger current semantic tree exercises the same controls without losing the boundary-reason/target-size assertions.Repair
d839aa9cbdd29735f5e2c8849658c4e975d1c7feis an ordinary fast-forward descendant ofcc45a298.... It restores the four validated blobs fromd2cf8db...in one commit, preserves all intervening history, performs no force-push/rebase, and introduces no foreign-owner file.Verification gate
Fresh exact-head repository/central CI, build, security/SAST, SBOM/supply-chain, coverage and review evidence is required for
d839aa9.... Predecessor workflow results and approvals do not transfer. Keep Draft until one unchanged exact head has terminal-success applicable gates, zero valid unresolved findings, and qualifying independent non-author current-head approval.Browser acceptance still needs mounted Workspace keyboard focus, tooltip hover/focus dismissal/persistence, pointer/touch behavior, boundary click suppression, exact accessible-name/description inspection, effective 44 px hit geometry, clipping/overlap, responsive/400% zoom, forced colors, and Narrator/VoiceOver evidence.
The protected central agent mention router is review-dispatch only. Mention-only activity is not source repair or approval. No self-approval, force-push, destructive rebase, gate weakening, synthetic status, no-op retry commit, or merge on predecessor evidence.