New extension for toggling element visibility based on the GlobalProvider state

[shweaver-MSFT]

Contributes to #97

PR Type

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

• Feature

What is the new behavior?

You can now toggle visibility for elements based on the specified provider state:

<TextBlock wgt:ElementExtensions.IsVisibleWhen="SignedIn" Text="Only visible when signed in" />
<TextBlock wgt:ElementExtensions.IsVisibleWhen="SignedOut" Text="Only visible when signed out" />
<TextBlock wgt:ElementExtensions.IsVisibleWhen="Loading" Text="You get the picture" />

PR Checklist

Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:

• Tested code with current supported SDKs
• Sample in sample app has been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)
  • Icon has been created (if new sample) following the Thumbnail Style Guide and templates
• Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features) (if applicable)
• Header has been added to all new source files (run build/UpdateHeaders.bat)
• Contains NO breaking changes

Other information

I'm not totally in love with "ElementExtensions" as the name, but don't have any better ideas and it is better than "FrameworkElementExtensions" which I think is just too long for simple usage in XAML. "ProviderExtensions" and "GraphExtensions" seem interesting, but we aren't really extending the providers or Graph client. I'm open to input.

[ghost]

Thanks shweaver-MSFT for opening a Pull Request! The reviewers will test the PR and highlight if there is any merge conflict or changes required. If the PR is approved we will proceed to merge the pull request 🙌

[shweaver-MSFT]

Thanks for the feedback @michael-hawker :)

Thinking about naming as well since it is a bit verbose... What do you think about:

<TextBlock wgt:ProviderExtensions.IsVisibleWhen="SignedIn" Text="Only visible when signed in" />
<TextBlock wgt:ProviderExtensions.IsVisibleWhen="SignedOut" Text="Only visible when signed out" />
<TextBlock wgt:ProviderExtensions.IsVisibleWhen="Loading" Text="You get the picture" />

CommunityToolkit.Graph.Uwp.ProviderExtensions is a bit funny naming, since it wouldn't be the same as the existing CommunityToolkit.Graph.ProviderExtensions. But I don't know if that is necessarily a bad thing... They are both static and will likely never be used in the same context (XAML vs in code).

Thoughts? What do you think @nmetulev?

I'm very open to other naming ideas 😅

[shweaver-MSFT]

@michael-hawker, also curious on your thoughts for restructuring the naming scheme ^