SSR: Handle attribute directives separately from tag directives

[ockham]

Follow-up to #133, addressing the following feedback:

I'm not sure if it'd be better to divide the definition of directive attributes and directive tags into different functions as we do in JavaScript. Something like process_wp_bind_tag and process_wp_bind_attribute.

(#133 (comment))

and

I wonder what would be more performant, doing get_attribute_names_with_prefix once per directive attribute, or just doing it once to get all the attributes and search for the directives ourselves.

(#133 (comment))

• Create new subfolders attributes and tags inside both src/directives/ and phpunit/directives/.
• In wp-directives.php, use separate arrays for attribute and tag directives.
• Remove now-obsolete code and tests from attribute directive processors (that would've dealt with being called on a tag directive).
• Differentiate process_wp_context_tag and process_wp_context_attribute.
• Disable unit test for wp-context attribute directive, as it's not implemented yet.

[DAreRodz]

Everything OK codewise. Approved! ✅

By the way, I see that you started calling directives to both tags and attributes. The idea I had in that regard was that just the attributes were directives, while the tags were simply components (like in Web Components).

I mean, the names you used are OK. I guess we'll reach a consensus with the terminology anytime soon, haha. 😄

[ockham]

Everything OK codewise. Approved! ✅

Thank you very much!

By the way, I see that you started calling directives to both tags and attributes. The idea I had in that regard was that just the attributes were directives, while the tags were simply components (like in Web Components).

Yeah, this is something that I believe I've discussed with @luisherranz (I thought it was at #118 but I can't find it right now) -- it seemed to me like Luis preferred that nomenclature over directive/component. I'm fine with either -- maybe "component" is a bit more likely to be confusing, since it's used in so many different contexts 🤔

I mean, the names you used are OK. I guess we'll reach a consensus with the terminology anytime soon, haha. 😄

Indeed! 😄

[luisherranz]

It was actually @dmsnell the first one who started using it. I adopted it right away because I thought it makes much more sense. I think others (@SantosGuillamot? @michalczaplinski?) have also been using it lately.

I guess we'll reach a consensus with the terminology anytime soon, haha.

You're totally right. We haven't discussed it anywhere. Sorry about that, David.

I'll add it to the Tracking Issue:

• Tracking issue: WordPress Directives Plugin 🎨 #80