Issue/forms 16264: Unique instances of calendar element - Githubissues

adobe / aem-core-forms-components

Standardized components to build forms with AEM Forms

Apache License 2.0

26 stars 58 forks source link

Issue/forms 16264: Unique instances of calendar element #1431

Closed anshikag-adobe closed 1 month ago

anshikag-adobe commented 1 month ago

Description

On creating multiple instances of date-time picker widget in a single form the same calendar element was being initialised to each unique instance of date-time picker hence fixed it to create unique instances of calendar element.

Related Issue

Motivation and Context

How Has This Been Tested?

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Types of changes

[x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
[ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
[ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

[x] I have signed the Adobe Open Source CLA.
[ ] My change requires a change to the documentation.
[ ] I have updated the documentation accordingly.
[ ] I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
[x] I have added tests to cover my changes and the overall coverage did not decrease.
[ ] All unit tests pass on CircleCi.
[x] I ran all tests locally and they pass.

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
focus-order-semantics	minor
label-title-only	serious
landmark-one-main	moderate
region	moderate
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Lighthouse scores (desktop)

	Performance	Accessibility	Best-Practices	SEO
Scores	100	96	96	75

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Lighthouse scores (mobile)

	Performance	Accessibility	Best-Practices	SEO
Scores	94	96	96	75

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
label-title-only	serious
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
label-title-only	serious
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
label-title-only	serious
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
focus-order-semantics	minor
label-title-only	serious
landmark-one-main	moderate
region	moderate
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
focus-order-semantics	minor
label-title-only	serious
landmark-one-main	moderate
region	moderate
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Lighthouse scores (mobile)

	Performance	Accessibility	Best-Practices	SEO
Scores	94	96	96	75

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Lighthouse scores (desktop)

	Performance	Accessibility	Best-Practices	SEO
Scores	100	96	96	75

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
label-title-only	serious
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Lighthouse scores (mobile)

	Performance	Accessibility	Best-Practices	SEO
Scores	95	96	96	75

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Lighthouse scores (desktop)

	Performance	Accessibility	Best-Practices	SEO
Scores	100	96	96	75

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
label-title-only	serious
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
label-title-only	serious
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
label-title-only	serious
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
label-title-only	serious
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
label-title-only	serious
target-size	serious

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Lighthouse scores (desktop)

	Performance	Accessibility	Best-Practices	SEO
Scores	100	96	96	75

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Lighthouse scores (mobile)

	Performance	Accessibility	Best-Practices	SEO
Scores	94	96	96	75

adobe-bot commented 1 month ago

Accessibility Violations Found

Id	Impact
label-title-only	serious
target-size	serious

codecov[bot] commented 1 month ago

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 82.24%. Comparing base (a0b4060) to head (d902368).

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## dev #1431 +/- ## ========================================= Coverage 82.24% 82.24% Complexity 923 923 ========================================= Files 103 103 Lines 2366 2366 Branches 321 321 ========================================= Hits 1946 1946 Misses 257 257 Partials 163 163 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/adobe/aem-core-forms-components/pull/1431/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=adobe) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [](https://app.codecov.io/gh/adobe/aem-core-forms-components/pull/1431/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=adobe) | `?` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=adobe#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.