Explain output mapping outcome in the tooltip

[barmac]

What should we do?

Adjust the outputs tooltip to explain the outcome of adding mapping:

Consider suggestions:

• All returned variables will become local task variables and only the mapped ones will be merged into the global scope.
• Add an output mapping to control what is merged back into the process scope.

The point is that leaving outputs empty means that all task variables are implicitly merged into the process scope. If you add a single mapping, remaining variables are discarded.

Note also that it's different for call activity where user can specify whether they want to merge the variables.

Why should we do it?

Explain basics in the Modeler to prevent context switching.

Reported at https://camunda.slack.com/archives/C0693F1NFK5/p1741593077729079

[barmac]

BTW the current tooltip is also misleading as the variables are not merged into the global scope if the task is in a subprocess. It's only that they are no longer in the local task scope anymore.

[nikku]

Let's tackle this, probably my proposal is good enough (updated with suggestions from #4889 (comment)):

Add output mappings to control which variables are merged back into the process scope.

We want to also tackle the input mappings accordingly.

Add input mappings to control what is passed to the activity as local variables.

[barmac]

CC @lmbateman

[lmbateman]

Sorry, sorry, I missed this earlier.

• Would it be better to mention variables in the output mappings tooltip? Something like, "Add output mappings to control which variables are merged back into the process scope."
• The input text looks OK to me, although I wonder if it makes sense to change "provided" to "passed".
• This might be a good time to move the links into the text, maybe around "input mappings" and "output mappings"; wdyt?

[nikku]

• Would it be better to mention variables in the output mappings tooltip? Something like, "Add output mappings to control which variables are merged back into the process scope."

Interesting question. The mapping can be used to pick variables, but it can also be used to transform / project:

isOver_18 = applicant.age > 18

I updated my proposal, incorporating your hints.

[Buckwich]

@lmbateman You mean like this?

My only concern with that is that its inconsistent with the other texts, so we should update them as well. And translations could be a bit more tricky

[nikku]

My only concern with that is that its inconsistent with the other texts

What would be inconsistent, because of the inline link? I think it is fine to keep Learn more, removing it was probably not @lmbateman's intention. What would be valuable though is to update the message, as per #4889 (comment).

You can find the updated message that incorporates @lmbateman's suggestions here.

[lmbateman]

I was suggesting removing "Learn more", in accordance with our new guidelines for documentation links in UI text. But Simon is right; we should probably do that more broadly rather than introducing it tooltip by tooltip. And I don't think we need two links to the same place, so let's leave "Learn more" for now.

@nikku's updated proposal looks good to me. Thanks!

[Buckwich]

I updated the PR1115 with the new texts, without changes to learn more. Thanks @nikku & @lmbateman .