Require explicit type attribute on button elements (#4781)

[guillermo-escire]

References

Fixes #4781

Description

This PR ensures that all elements explicitly define their type attribute, preventing unintended form submissions and aligning the codebase with accessibility and HTML best practices.

Instructions for Reviewers

This PR updates multiple Angular templates to explicitly define the type attribute on all

elements. The main goal is to prevent unexpected form submissions caused by the default type="submit" behavior and to comply with the ESLint rule proposed in #4781.

List of changes in this PR:

• Added explicit type="button" to buttons used only for UI actions (click handlers, navigation, modal controls, dropdown actions, pagination, etc.).
• Ensured type="submit" is only used for buttons that intentionally submit forms.
• Updated button definitions across multiple components and templates to consistently comply with the ESLint rule require-button-type.
• Improved overall accessibility and predictability of form behavior.

How to test / review:

1. Run npm run lint and verify that no ESLint warnings remain related to missing button types.
2. Navigate through UI sections containing modified buttons (modals, dropdowns, search forms, admin pages, reports, submission forms).
3. Verify that:

• Buttons do not trigger unintended form submissions.
• Forms still submit correctly when expected.
• No UI regressions were introduced.

Checklist

• My PR is created against the main branch of code (unless it is a backport or is fixing an issue specific to an older branch).
• My PR is small in size (e.g. less than 1,000 lines of code, not including comments & specs/tests), or I have provided reasons as to why that's not possible.
• My PR passes ESLint validation using npm run lint
• My PR doesn't introduce circular dependencies (verified via npm run check-circ-deps)
• My PR includes TypeDoc comments for all new (or modified) public methods and classes. It also includes TypeDoc for large or complex private methods.
• My PR passes all specs/tests and includes new/updated specs or tests based on the Code Testing Guide.
• My PR aligns with Accessibility guidelines if it makes changes to the user interface.
• My PR uses i18n (internationalization) keys instead of hardcoded English text, to allow for translations.
• My PR includes details on how to test it. I've provided clear instructions to reviewers on how to successfully test this fix or feature.
• If my PR includes new libraries/dependencies (in package.json), I've made sure their licenses align with the DSpace BSD License based on the Licensing of Contributions documentation.
• If my PR includes new features or configurations, I've provided basic technical documentation in the PR itself.
• If my PR fixes an issue ticket, I've linked them together.

[tdonohue]

@guillermo-escire : This PR is currently failing lint checks

[github-actions]

Hi @guillermo-escire,
Conflicts have been detected against the base branch.
Please resolve these conflicts as soon as you can. Thanks!

[alexandrevryghem]

@guillermo-escire Thnx for this PR, I haven't tested the code but while looking at the file changes I noticed that you accidentally reverted code changes from main during your rebase. I (think) I added an inline comment for all the issues, but could you take a look as well and revert them?

[alexandrevryghem]

This file should be removed

[guillermo-escire]

Hi @alexandrevryghem, thank you for the detailed review.

I’ve addressed all the comments and reverted the unintended changes introduced during the rebase. The affected files have been restored to match main, and only the intended updates (adding type="button" to buttons) were kept where appropriate.

I’ll push the updated changes shortly.

Thanks again for your feedback!

[alexandrevryghem]

@guillermo-escire: Thnx I've verified that most of the changes were reverted but 6 of them still need to be fixed could you take a look again? (I marked all the fixed ones as resolved so those comments should already be collapsed)