Block Bindings iteration for WordPress 6.8

[SantosGuillamot]

Iteration of #60954.

This issue will be used to gather the new functionalities and bug fixes expected to be included in WordPress 6.8. It will serve to share regular updates and progress.

Please keep in mind that the list of issues will change once new ones come up.

For this iteration of WordPress 6.8, there will be two main focuses:

• Improve the UI and make it extensible: Right now, the UI to create bindings is only available post meta. The idea is to polish it and explore using DataViews, which comes with some benefits, and figure out the proper APIs to let other sources hook into this.
• Create mechanisms to support more blocks: As explained in this issue, there are a few limitations that need to be solved before allowing more blocks to use block bindings. Not all the limitations apply to all blocks, so the idea is to approach it progressively. For example, dynamic blocks only need the attributes locking and the opt-in mechanism solved. Or it can support basic CSS selectors as a first step for static blocks.

UI to create bindings

• Explore integrating DataViews in the UI.
  • Draft: Use DataViews for post-meta and custom sources block bindings. #67012
• API for server sources without arguments.
• API for server sources with input arguments.
• API for server sources that want to reuse the "Fields UI".
• API for client sources that want to empower the Fields UI with reactivity or editing, for example.
• API for client sources that want their custom UI.

Support for more blocks

• Mechanism to let attribute controls know if they should be editable or not.
• Opt-in mechanism for bindings.
  • Block Bindings: Use role content to enable block bindings attributes/ #67745
• Use set_inner_html in bindings processing.
• Use HTML API CSS selectors in bindings processing.
• Open up "Pattern Overrides" and therefore intern block bindings to custom dynamic blocks: This one should be a consequence of working on the previous points.
  • Open up "Pattern Overrides" and therefore intern block bindings to custom dynamic blocks #64870

Other

• Allow editing connected blocks in the site editor outside of post content.
  • Block Bindings: Edit connected blocks in site editor #66798
• Support for connecting custom fields in any template.
• Explore the possibility of abstracting async calls.
  • Block Bindings: Allow async call in getValues API #66962

Bug fixes

• Change "This block is connected" indicator to make it accessible.
• Keep bindings editor calls in their own logic useSelect.

[fabiankaegy]

@SantosGuillamot I would love to see if we can look at #64870 in the 6.8 cycle. From what it seems that shouldn't be too large a lift and would already go a long way in extending the block bindings support :)

[gziolo]

• Block Bindings: Improve accessibility of bound paragraphs when using a screenreader in Navigation Mode #62933

This one can be removed from the list. There will no longer be the Navigation Mode. It's going to be replaced with the Write and Content modes.

[SantosGuillamot]

I would love to see if we can look at #64870 in the 6.8 cycle.

I didn't specify it, but it's part of the planning somehow 🙂 The idea is that working on the abstractions to open it for more blocks, it will also solve that issue. To open this for dynamic blocks it is enough with these two points:

• Mechanism to let attribute controls know if they should be editable or not.
• Opt-in mechanism for bindings.

Whatever is done for bindings should work for pattern overrides as well. I'll add it to the list to ensure it is tracked.

[fabiankaegy]

@SantosGuillamot Thanks :) My main point for calling it out specifically is that I don't think this should be held back by the wait for the HTML API which is currently blocking the adoption for static blocks. :)

[SantosGuillamot]

Totally agree 🙂 That's why I added this clarification: "Not all the limitations apply to all blocks, so the idea is to approach it progressively. For example, dynamic blocks only need the attributes locking and the opt-in mechanism solved." But it is good to have the issue in the list as well.