aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorsmcv <smcv@web>2014-07-11 18:24:16 -0400
committeradmin <admin@branchable.com>2014-07-11 18:24:16 -0400
commitbb94da88c4db4e3942794e789c28145b5d27fd85 (patch)
tree5ffc211b1c3b28daf56ff0ff50a692178fc2adfd
parent51e6dc3388febf2c5cb01837e56647e9e48bc917 (diff)
downloadikiwiki-bb94da88c4db4e3942794e789c28145b5d27fd85.tar
ikiwiki-bb94da88c4db4e3942794e789c28145b5d27fd85.tar.gz
respond to cbaines regarding CSS
-rw-r--r--doc/plugins/contrib/album/discussion.mdwn30
1 files changed, 30 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/plugins/contrib/album/discussion.mdwn b/doc/plugins/contrib/album/discussion.mdwn
index e504c49a0..442d02df0 100644
--- a/doc/plugins/contrib/album/discussion.mdwn
+++ b/doc/plugins/contrib/album/discussion.mdwn
@@ -833,3 +833,33 @@ to `doc/style.css` should be enough? --[[smcv]]
>>> And right you are, unsure how I missed that. My album branch is now rebased
>>> on your album5 branch (with the two now useless commits removed).
>>> --[[cbaines]]
+
+cbaines, would you mind publishing an album with more realistic pixel-sizes
+of images using your modified CSS? It's difficult to get an idea of how it
+will degrade under conditions like "image size > browser window" with
+images as small as the ones you used. You might find
+<http://git.pseudorandom.co.uk/smcv/ikiwiki-demos/ikialbum.git>
+(`git clone git://git.pseudorandom.co.uk/git/smcv/ikiwiki-demos/ikialbum.git`),
+or the same techniques, useful: it contains images with a realistic pixel
+count, but very very lossy JPEG compression, to keep the size in bytes low.
+
+It's much, much easier to review changes if you use separate commits for
+cosmetic changes like "separate index CSS from viewer CSS" and "more
+consistent indentation", and functional changes like turning the prev/next
+links from absolutely-positioned to floating. I'd be happy to apply
+the cosmetic changes if they were in commits that were literally only
+cosmetic changes, with no functional effect.
+
+For the functional bits: I think I'd have used floating boxes instead of the
+absolutely-positioned boxes that are currently used if they provided the effect
+I wanted. I can't remember exactly why I didn't do that now, but
+it might have been because if the browser window shrinks below the image width,
+floats have weird behaviour (they push the actual image out of the way), or because
+I wanted the entire left/right margin of the image to be clickable to have
+a large click-target for scrolling through the album.
+
+If there's something specific that you think is wrong with the CSS in my
+branch, could you please explain it, and perhaps we can come up with something
+that matches both our requirements?
+
+--smcv