On 10/4/12, Gary Martin <[email protected]> wrote: > Perhaps we could continue the discussion started in > https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/ticket/206 here.. > > On 03/10/12 21:10, Apache Bloodhound wrote: >> #206: Ticket fields layout broken if custom textarea fields are declared >> [...] >> I think full row is necessary for textarea fields . If using two >> columns >> layout width will vary depending on whether Activity feed is available >> or >> not . Is that the idea ? >> [...] > > The full width idea may well make sense for custom textareas. My only > worry would be that it could give a similar prominence for those to the > description which might be confusing. >
That's why description box (i.e. .well) has been moved to the top after applying submitted patches . Indeed placed after the first row of select | radio fields. > The two columns of key:values takes up the same amount of room as the > current 4 column key/value ... well ... technically speaking at the moment it's 4 columns *IF* Activity feed is shown to the right . Otherwise they would be more (... 6 afaicr ...) > but effectively makes better use of the space > for wide fields. therefore that's why I asked this question in first place . The design will be about two columns of ticket fields , or about sizing each one using span4 . *IF* Activity feed is available it's the same thing , otherwise there will be three columns . So which one are we talking about ? FWIW I'd rather choose span4 > Most of the fields already displayed have the > opportunity to have long strings if the users are not careful. > +1 > One thing I was wondering about was whether we could set a limit on the > number of fields that are considered to be important so that the some > fields can be treated differently. I already have , somehow . Proposed patch treats first row of ticket fields to be more prominent . It's placed on top of description box . Configurable threshold you mean ? hmmm ... IMO -1 . One row (maybe two) should be enough . > We might, for example, want to say > that above a given threshold number of fields, the less important fields > are either separated from the others by the description or further > relegated to an expandable section. > This is implemented already , as I mentioned . I'm not sure about collapsible section though. Please take a look at the patches and screenshots . Is that ok ? -- Regards, Olemis. Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ Featured article:
