As a user, I want to easily navigate to the IGA web page for a bill.

[jhoerr]

Have had a couple folks asking for this, so should be bumped up in priority.

[ohnoitsaustin]

Does the Link attribute in the DB (like on the Bill table) not refer to a page on iga.in.gov? Is it just a relic of the iga API? I added links to bills and committees (currently up on test), but they are not the right URLs. Should I construct the URLs in the laravel models, or is this a bug in the functions (should these be valid URLs)?

Here's what's being generated vs actual iga URLs PtP: http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2017/committees/committee_ways_and_means_2200 working URL: http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2017/committees/ways_and_means_2200

PtP: http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2017/bills/hb1001 working URL: http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2017/bills/house/1001

I'm prepending http://iga.in.gov/legislative to the Link attribute to generate these.

[jhoerr]

It does not, unfortunately. It's an API URL. They're almost but not quite the same.

Should I construct the URLs in the laravel models

Yeah, I think so. :\

[ohnoitsaustin]

This is up on test now - tried a sample of links, and I think they're all working correctly. You can see the logic in the Bill.php and Committee.php models' GetIgaSiteLinkAttribute() method.

[jhoerr]

This is great! Looks good to me. I wonder if we might want to remove the bill link from the title since it duplicates the link on the bill name?

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 9:33 PM, Austin Lord notifications@github.com wrote:

This is up on test now - tried a sample of links, and I think they're all working correctly. You can see the logic in the Bill.php and Committee.php models' GetIgaSiteLinkAttribute() method.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/jhoerr/iga-tracker-web/issues/30#issuecomment-292044054, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABGQ5oIXIT9cdWD0TEE2N9U7WkX0cC3wks5rtED5gaJpZM4MpKSB .

-- John Hoerr jhoerr@gmail.com 503.360.6581

[ohnoitsaustin]

Valid point, I've removed the links from the title.

Should these open in a new tab? My rule of thumb is usually for anything on a different site to open in a new tab, but I know some people aren't as fond of managing tabs. Maybe get Allison or some other user's opinions?

[jhoerr]

Is there an accessibility best practice there? I'm not crazy about opening in new tabs, but i could see the value if, for example, it would preserve the search context in All Legislation.

-- John Hoerr (mobile) 503.360.6581

On Apr 6, 2017, at 9:23 AM, Austin Lord notifications@github.com wrote:

Valid point, I've removed the links from the title.

Should these open in a new tab? My rule of thumb is usually for anything on a different site to open in a new tab, but I know some people aren't as fond of managing tabs. Maybe get Allison or some other user's opinions?

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[ohnoitsaustin]

yeah, not so much accessibility as usability. The search case is a good example - if you have a search pulled up and click one of the links, clicking back will result in your search being cleared. Ditto if you're looking at a page other than the first page. In the interest of those cases, I would say new tabs are the way to go for now.

FWIW, if we really didn't want to open new tabs for whatever reason (like our users hate it), one solution would be to alter the browser history when searching/paging so that clicking back bring you back to the same context. But, that involves quite a bit more development, so I'm going to go with target=_blank for now.

[ohnoitsaustin]

This is up on test and I have a 1.1.1 release ready to go. Anything else you want to get on it?