Closed
Bug 1148050
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
Type Control Visual Improvements
Categories
(Firefox :: General, defect, P3)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: mmaslaney, Assigned: bwinton)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 3 obsolete files)
(deleted),
patch
|
bwinton
:
review+
bwinton
:
ui-review+
Sylvestre
:
approval-mozilla-aurora+
Sylvestre
:
approval-mozilla-beta+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Here's a mockup of what the Type Controls should look like, versus what they currently look like: http://invis.io/3D2JR8ZJ5
We should try and clean this up a bit.
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
Can you talk a little bit more about what you want to happen in #2? (I think I understand #1, #3, and #4…)
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
Sure, the current implementation has the orange rule right above the gray outline, which is technically not wrong, but creates a bit of a blur effect. I'm wondering if we could extend the orange rule's height just one pixel, so that it covers the gray line.
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
Okay, let me know what you'ld like cleaned up in this version… :)
(Screenshot at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2301433/Firefox/Reading/PanelV1.png )
One thing I noticed was that the spec had the + on the left, but the implementation has the + on the right. Is that something we should switch, or was that an intentional change?
Reporter | ||
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Blake Winton (:bwinton) from comment #3)
> Created attachment 8584614 [details] [diff] [review]
> The first cut at the patch.
>
> Okay, let me know what you'ld like cleaned up in this version… :)
> (Screenshot at
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2301433/Firefox/Reading/PanelV1.png )
• Type samples should roughly be the same size (use San Serif as the size benchmark)
• Move Type labels slightly closure to the samples
> One thing I noticed was that the spec had the + on the left, but the
> implementation has the + on the right. Is that something we should switch,
> or was that an intentional change?
• Yes, thank you for bringing that up, ignore that part of the spec. We decided to move forward with the
- | + format across platforms.
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8584614 [details] [diff] [review]
The first cut at the patch.
• Type samples should roughly be the same size (use San Serif as the size benchmark)
• Move Type labels slightly closure to the samples
Attachment #8584614 -
Flags: ui-review?(mmaslaney) → ui-review-
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•10 years ago
|
||
How do you feel about https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2301433/Firefox/Reading/PanelV2.png instead?
(It's subtle, but I swear I did what you asked for… ;)
Flags: needinfo?(mmaslaney)
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•10 years ago
|
||
Okay, here's the patch with the updated styles.
Attachment #8584614 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8584867 -
Flags: ui-review?(mmaslaney)
Attachment #8584867 -
Flags: review?(bmcbride)
Comment 9•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8584867 [details] [diff] [review]
The second cut at the patch.
Review of attachment 8584867 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
::: toolkit/themes/windows/global/aboutReader.css
@@ +22,5 @@
> .dark-button {
> color: #eeeeee;
> background-color: #333333;
> + margin-top: -1px;
> + height: 61px !important;
This affects both the button and the page content. And !important is codesmell.
I'd rather see these additions split out to their own selector and moved to be beside the "#color-scheme-buttons > button" selectors. Having a selector like #color-scheme-buttons > .dark-button" would avoid the need for !important, and make it more obvious what it's doing.
@@ +352,5 @@
> }
>
> #color-scheme-buttons > button {
> width: 33.33%;
> + border: 0;
There's a selector at line 344 that sets top/right/bottom border to 0 for these, which is now redundant.
@@ +367,5 @@
> + font-size: 58px;
> + height: 100px;
> +}
> +
> +#font-type-buttons > .serif-button {
This would benefit from a comment.
Attachment #8584867 -
Flags: review?(bmcbride) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Blair McBride [:Unfocused] (I don't read bugmail - needinfo? me!) from comment #9)
> ::: toolkit/themes/windows/global/aboutReader.css
> @@ +22,5 @@
> > .dark-button {
> > color: #eeeeee;
> > background-color: #333333;
> > + margin-top: -1px;
> > + height: 61px !important;
>
> This affects both the button and the page content. And !important is
> codesmell.
>
> I'd rather see these additions split out to their own selector and moved to
> be beside the "#color-scheme-buttons > button" selectors. Having a selector
> like #color-scheme-buttons > .dark-button" would avoid the need for
> !important, and make it more obvious what it's doing.
Good call. Changed!
> @@ +352,5 @@
> > #color-scheme-buttons > button {
> > width: 33.33%;
> > + border: 0;
> There's a selector at line 344 that sets top/right/bottom border to 0 for
> these, which is now redundant.
That selector also affected the other buttons, so I've moved this line up to that block, since the border-left gets overridden in the other buttons.
> @@ +367,5 @@
> > +#font-type-buttons > .serif-button {
> This would benefit from a comment.
Added!
Thanks for the review! :)
Attachment #8584867 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8584867 -
Flags: ui-review?(mmaslaney)
Attachment #8585037 -
Flags: ui-review?(mmaslaney)
Attachment #8585037 -
Flags: review+
Reporter | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Attachment #8585037 -
Flags: ui-review?(mmaslaney) → ui-review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Keywords: checkin-needed
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•10 years ago
|
||
Here you go!
Attachment #8585037 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8586175 -
Flags: ui-review+
Attachment #8586175 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•10 years ago
|
||
(Did I get the flags right, Ryan?)
Comment 14•10 years ago
|
||
Keywords: checkin-needed
Whiteboard: [fixed-in-fx-team]
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
status-firefox40:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Whiteboard: [fixed-in-fx-team]
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 40
Comment 16•10 years ago
|
||
Hi Blake, can you provide a point value.
Iteration: --- → 40.1 - 13 Apr
Flags: qe-verify?
Flags: needinfo?(bwinton)
Flags: firefox-backlog+
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Points: --- → 2
Flags: needinfo?(bwinton)
Comment 17•10 years ago
|
||
Blake, I guess you want this to be uplifted to 38, right?
if it is the case, could you fill the uplift request, thanks.
Flags: needinfo?(bwinton)
Assignee | ||
Comment 18•10 years ago
|
||
Hi Sylvestre! I normally leave these to Jaws, who has been doing a lot of work on uplifts for reader-mode/reading-list, but here's the request details…
[User impact if declined]: Users will see an uglier font-panel.
[Describe test coverage new/current, TBPL]: Manual testing, and has been on mozilla-central for a day.
[Risks and why]: Low risk because its a small CSS change impacting only the reader-mode settings popup.
[String/UUID change made/needed]: none
Do I also need to ask for uplift to 39, or is that implied by tracking-38?
Flags: needinfo?(bwinton)
Comment 19•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8586175 [details] [diff] [review]
Rebased patch.
(I think bwinton meant to flip these flags)
Attachment #8586175 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Attachment #8586175 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Updated•10 years ago
|
Comment 20•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8586175 [details] [diff] [review]
Rebased patch.
Should be in 38 beta 2
Attachment #8586175 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Attachment #8586175 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta+
Attachment #8586175 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Attachment #8586175 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora+
Comment 21•10 years ago
|
||
Comment 22•10 years ago
|
||
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•