validation added to NumericalInput to just accept numerical values on block creation form #2615

jesusbalderramawgu · 2025-11-11T17:42:43Z

Description

There's a bug with Numerical Input Component which Incorrectly Handles Formulas as numericalresponse.
after some research and talking with the community we agreed to validate the author block form to just accept numeric values in the answers.

this is how the form will show the error if the value is not numeric.

it closes [#1680]

openedx-webhooks · 2025-11-11T17:42:48Z

Thanks for the pull request, @jesusbalderramawgu!

This repository is currently maintained by @bradenmacdonald.

Once you've gone through the following steps feel free to tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for engineering review.

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
- This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.

🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

Dependencies

This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...
Blockers

This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.
Timeline information

This PR must be merged by XX date because ...
Partner information

This is for a course on edx.org.
Supporting documentation
Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads

🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.

Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
The need for product review
Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

diana-villalvazo-wgu · 2025-11-11T18:21:36Z

Suggestion: In the description of the PR you can add Fixes #{PR number} or Closes #{PR number} so when this PR is merged the Github issue will be closed automatically

src/editors/containers/ProblemEditor/components/EditProblemView/AnswerWidget/messages.js

jacobo-dominguez-wgu · 2025-11-12T19:15:27Z

You need to follow the conventional commits messages

bradenmacdonald · 2025-11-13T17:22:18Z

Thanks! Let me know once the other reviewers have approved it, or if you need me to approve some more test runs.

kdmccormick

Thanks for your work so far @jesusbalderramawgu !

src/editors/containers/ProblemEditor/components/EditProblemView/AnswerWidget/messages.js

kdmccormick · 2025-11-13T21:07:53Z

src/editors/containers/ProblemEditor/components/EditProblemView/AnswerWidget/AnswerOption.jsx

      );
    }
    if (problemType !== ProblemTypeKeys.NUMERIC || !answer.isAnswerRange) {
+     const isValidValue = validateAnswerNumeric(answer.title)


The example formula provided in the "Select Problem Type" modal (m*c^2) is not valid for numeric input:

Here is a valid formula I typed into a numeric problem, and then took a screenshot of:

Unfortunately, it's not visually consistent with the rest of the example problem images in the modal. I'll reach out to see if we can get our hands on the original images... ( @marcotuts , any chance you have access to them?). In the meantime, feel free to use my screenshot, even if it looks a little off.

Marco's working on a new image to put here, will post it here soon~

here you go!

(for future reference: this image and its counterparts are now in the Authoring Figma file)

kdmccormick · 2025-11-13T21:12:51Z

src/editors/containers/ProblemEditor/data/OLXParser.js

 */
 export const answerRangeFormatRegex = /^[([]\s*-?(?:\d+(?:\.\d+)?|\d+\/\d+)\s*,\s*-?(?:\d+(?:\.\d+)?|\d+\/\d+)\s*[)\]]$/m;
-
+export const numericRegex = /^[+-]?(\d+(\.\d*)?|\.\d+)$/;


Numeric input problems can also include sin, pi, and a few other functions.

I would ask you to reference the docs (https://docs.openedx.org/en/latest/educators/references/course_development/exercise_tools/numerical_input.html), but those docs aren't entirely correct either 🤦🏻 In particular, the docs say that g is allows, but this does not work in practice.

I'll have to do some digging in the code to figure out what's really allowed; I'll circle back. In the meantime, can you try updating the regex to include pi, sqrt, sin, arcscin, cos, arccos, tan, arctan, log2, and parenthases ( ) ?

OK, here's the function which perform the numeric evaluation: https://github.com/openedx/openedx-calc/blob/master/calc/calc.py#L239

And here's the call site: https://github.com/openedx/edx-platform/blob/f4f14a69874d5804ef33778486f7d6cab400e206/xmodule/capa/responsetypes.py#L1563

Note that both variables and unary_functions are passed in as {}.

@jesusbalderramawgu , would you or your team be able to reverse engineer this function in order to figure out exactly what is allowed in a numeric input formula?

sure, I will check this with the team

Hello, just to follow up on the ticket, I'm still checking because now needs more work the validation part.
After this feedback, the frontend shouldn't validate if is a valid math expression, it should be on the backend. After some review I found an endpoint to do this validation but it's really attached to django views, so I'm looking for a way of request this from react and validate the input component.
I'll keep you posted, thanks in advance!

I was also thinking that the validation might need to happen on the backend, glad to see you came to the same conclusion.

Perhaps we need to factor out a new REST API for the validation? Curious to hear what you find.

hey @jesusbalderramawgu , thanks for looking into this. That particular approach is not viable, because we need the editor to be able to work without saving the Problem first. You can see the importance of this by going into Libraries (Beta), creating a Problem, and hitting "Cancel" instead of saving: notice that no Problem is created.

(In Courses, on the other hand, if you being creating a Problem and hit "Cancel", you will end up with a blank problem which you have to then delete. This is an undesirable legacy behavior which we'll want to fix one day.)

I think we'll need a new endpoint, maybe one that just takes an answer string and validates it for a particular response type (formula, numeric, etc.)?

thanks for your feedback @kdmccormick, I checked what you said about the flow and I agree.
a new endpoint is required for this then, it should receive a string and return a boolean to know if is valid or not.
do you know who can help with the creation of this endpoint?

@jesusbalderramawgu I'm happy to help. For the ProblemBlock, you can define an endpoint handler by adding a method to the _BuiltInProblemBlock class which takes JSON-friendly data dict as input and return JSON-frienly dict as output. Then, add the method to the handlers dict. The endpoint's URL is the base URL of the block, plus the dict key.

For example, calling:
POST /courses/<course_key>/xblock/<usage_key>/handler/xmodule_handler/problem_check

will look up problem_check in the handlers dict and call the submit_problem method.

Let me know if you could use more pointers, and feel free to book sync time with me if that'd be helpful. https://tinyurl.com/meet-with-kyle

Hello, @kdmccormick, I checked with the team and I just pushed this morning this PR with the new endpoint
openedx/edx-platform#37677
but I see is in a different path and with different approach.
Basically I was thinking in avoid the blockId and courseId, just passing the formula and returning if is valid or not. so we can reuse this in other places if is required.
what do you think about this approach?
what you explained looks good as well I can change it into that approach for sure

I've updated the FE pull request as well, now it works properly. the only thing that is pending is the endpoint.
thanks for your feedback

codecov · 2025-11-14T22:53:22Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 91.30435% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 94.86%. Comparing base (36c9eba) to head (f9ce381).
⚠️ Report is 46 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ents/EditProblemView/AnswerWidget/AnswerOption.jsx	88.88%	1 Missing ⚠️
.../editors/containers/ProblemEditor/data/apiHooks.ts	90.90%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2615      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.81%   94.86%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files        1225     1234       +9     
  Lines       27481    27963     +482     
  Branches     6187     6360     +173     
==========================================
+ Hits        26056    26526     +470     
+ Misses       1367     1366       -1     
- Partials       58       71      +13

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

…alues

Co-authored-by: Kyle McCormick <[email protected]>

jesusbalderramawgu · 2025-11-15T00:20:27Z

You need to follow the conventional commits messages

thanks, I made the change in the current commit messages and I'll keep this in mind for future PR

… to see if is a valid math expression

diana-villalvazo-wgu · 2025-11-24T17:14:28Z

src/editors/data/redux/thunkActions/requests.js

  }));
 };

+export const validateNumericInput = ({ title, ...rest }) => (dispatch, getState) => {


i remember here in authoring in some places they are now using react-query, if its a complete new implementation/endpoint/etc, maybe will be best to use react query from start to avoid the re-work when we move from redux to react-query 🤔

thanks for your comment, I did it this way because this page is really linked to redux and didn't wanna make a mix.
should I change this then to react-query?

I am not an expert here, but I think it could get complex to have a mix of Redux and RQ on the same page, so my inclination is to stay consistent and use Redux when we're just making small additions to existing things. Do you agree @diana-villalvazo-wgu or do you think it'd be better to put his part in RQ?

It really depends on the separation of concerns. If this numeric input validation is a fairly isolated piece of code that checks some input value via an API and then displays a message, it's probably pretty easy to implement using React Query and mix-and-match is with redux. But if there are interactions between this validation state and other parts of the existing redux state, then it's probably more trouble than it's worth. Either way is fine with me.

+1 Same as Braden, i suggested it because i saw that it wasn't really interacting with other things, was a new endpoint call and just appended the result, and just to avoid future re-work, but if it causes any trouble im ok with it too

thanks everyone for your comments. I've updated the PR to use react query instead of redux given that this validation is isolated.
I've made a file called "apiHooks.ts" inside ProblemEditors/Data folder given that the ProblemEditor wasn't using react query and to follow the same nomenclature as the other folders with react query.
the only thing that is left is the change in the API with Kyle's suggestion. I'll check that tomorrow.
thanks for your feedback

@jesusbalderramawgu I realized that my validation endpoint suggestion is flawed because it requires that a ProblemBlock be saved :)

I like your approach. I have some thoughts on the details--I'll leave a review tomorrow.

regarding the new endpoint, I've left a review on: openedx/edx-platform#37677

…f redux

…der added

openedx-webhooks added the open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U label Nov 11, 2025

openedx-webhooks added this to Contributions Nov 11, 2025

github-project-automation bot moved this to Needs Triage in Contributions Nov 11, 2025

holaontiveros approved these changes Nov 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

diana-villalvazo-wgu added the mao-onboarding Reviewing this will help onboard devs from an Axim mission-aligned organization (MAO). label Nov 11, 2025

diana-villalvazo-wgu moved this from Needs Triage to Ready for Review in Contributions Nov 11, 2025

diana-villalvazo-wgu reviewed Nov 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/editors/containers/ProblemEditor/components/EditProblemView/AnswerWidget/messages.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

diana-villalvazo-wgu requested a review from bradenmacdonald November 11, 2025 18:28

jacobo-dominguez-wgu reviewed Nov 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/editors/containers/ProblemEditor/components/EditProblemView/AnswerWidget/messages.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

kdmccormick requested changes Nov 13, 2025

View reviewed changes

mphilbrick211 moved this from Ready for Review to In Eng Review in Contributions Nov 13, 2025

kdmccormick mentioned this pull request Nov 14, 2025

[DEPR]: Legacy Problem Editor openedx/edx-platform#36261

Open

jesusbalderramawgu and others added 3 commits November 14, 2025 18:11

feat(form): add validation to NumericalInput to accept only numeric v…

740a7b8

…alues

style(format): fix spaces and update message to camelCase

d669d7e

fix(content): update text for clarity

14d2c72

Co-authored-by: Kyle McCormick <[email protected]>

jesusbalderramawgu force-pushed the OEXCOM-245/AUTH-BLOCK-FORM-VALIDATION branch from 842e6a2 to 14d2c72 Compare November 15, 2025 00:15

feat(validation): validation added to numeric input with new endpoint…

c24cb0d

… to see if is a valid math expression

jesusbalderramawgu mentioned this pull request Nov 24, 2025

feat(numericalInput): endpoint added to validate a numerical input openedx/edx-platform#37677

Open

diana-villalvazo-wgu reviewed Nov 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

kdmccormick self-requested a review November 24, 2025 20:12

jesusbalderramawgu added 4 commits November 24, 2025 18:18

fix(content): change in input validation to use react query instead o…

49ac070

…f redux

fix(content): change in types to avoid ci errors

0b72cd9

fix(content): remove unnecessary code after changing to react query

9b57066

fix(content): change numeric input validation path to new url and loa…

f9ce381

…der added

validation added to NumericalInput to just accept numerical values on block creation form #2615

Are you sure you want to change the base?

validation added to NumericalInput to just accept numerical values on block creation form #2615

Conversation

jesusbalderramawgu commented Nov 11, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Uh oh!

openedx-webhooks commented Nov 11, 2025

Uh oh!

diana-villalvazo-wgu commented Nov 11, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jacobo-dominguez-wgu commented Nov 12, 2025

Uh oh!

bradenmacdonald commented Nov 13, 2025

Uh oh!

kdmccormick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kdmccormick Nov 14, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kdmccormick Nov 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Nov 14, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

jesusbalderramawgu commented Nov 15, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

diana-villalvazo-wgu Nov 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kdmccormick Nov 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

jesusbalderramawgu commented Nov 11, 2025 •

edited

Loading

kdmccormick Nov 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading

kdmccormick Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Nov 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading

diana-villalvazo-wgu Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

kdmccormick Nov 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading