> On 29 May 2018, at 18:11, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 7:07 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> On 29 May 2018, at 18:00, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 6:48 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Caty,
>>>>
>>>>> On 29 May 2018, at 17:23, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi devs,
>>>>>
>>>>> Just to make sure we are on the same page since there were some
>>>> ambiguities
>>>>> on the proposal, I've put some screenshot on how it will look like:
>>>>> http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/
>>>> IdeaVisibleSave#HProposal10.x
>>>>
>>>> Could you give some context to explain why we need a VOTE and what
>> you’re
>>>> asking to VOTE about?
>>>>
>>>> AFAIK there’s no need to VOTE on having Visible Save button since:
>>>> * We already discussed and decided to implement visible save
>>>> * It was already put twice in the roadmap and is currently in the 10.5
>>>> roadmap (which is already started), and nobody complained
>>>>
>>>> So if your email is about bringing some variations to what was decided,
>>>> it’s fine but why does it need a VOTE? A simple proposal would have been
>>>> enough IMO.
>>>>
>>>>> This proposal extracts the save controls and puts them on a fixed
>> bottom
>>>>> bar.
>>>>
>>>> Does it mean that the vertical space for the editor is constrained and
>> can
>>>> never be larger than the viewport minus the vertical space for the save
>> bar?
>>>>
>>>> Also on the http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Proposal/
>>>> IdeaVisibleSave/after10.png screenshot the bar takes the full width but
>>>> on the followings screenshots the bar doesn’t. What is proposed
>> precisely?
>>>>
>>>
>>> So if the window has space, the buttons should be placed normally (
>>> http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Proposal/
>> IdeaVisibleSave/after10Full.png).
>>> The save buttons are placed in a fixed bottom bar, only if they get out
>> of
>>> the view port (
>>> http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Proposal/
>> IdeaVisibleSave/after10.png).
>>
>> I still don’t understand this. The only difference I see between mode
>> images is the width of the save bar.
>>
>> My preference goes to not full width for the save bar, i.e. width of the
>> editor only.
>>
>>> Inline mode is more problematic because it has panels (looks a bit
>> strange
>>> to be full width, see
>>> http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Proposal/IdeaVisibleSave/
>> after10Inline2.png
>>> ). Ideally the buttons should be kept in the container they refer to, so
>> in
>>> xwiki content.
>>
>> Yes I agree. Why is this a problem? Why not have the same width for the
>> visible bar than the container?
>>
>>> I made screenshots with how it would look on both modes, but
>>> depends on what we can actually implement. Don't have an ideal answer for
>>> inline mode.
>>
>> Why is http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/download/Proposal/
>> IdeaVisibleSave/after10Inline.png a problem?
>>
>
> Maybe it's not a problem. We will see how we can implement it. Hope we
> won't use JS to calculate the width.
Ah you mean a problem to implement it, not a problem from a design POV.
How is it different than the wiki or wysiwyg editor width for example?
It can also take the full width - padding for the middle column (DIV).
I really don’t see why we would need JS for that! :) (but I’m not an expert for
sure)
Thanks
-Vincent
>
>
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Caty
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Could you explain what’s different between "Proposal for 9.x" and
>>>> "Proposal for 10.x" on http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/
>>>> IdeaVisibleSave#HProposal10.x
>>>>
>>>> I’ve checked quickly and I don’t see any difference visually.
>>>>
>>>>> There are some problems with the inline mode and with the responsive
>>>>> versions.
>>>>> With the inline version we could decide to keep the current
>>>>> behavior and have the fixed bar only in Wiki and WYSIWYG modes. I guess
>>>> we
>>>>> should do some implementation tests and see what's possible.
>>>>
>>>> What problems?
>>>>
>>>> At this stage I can’t VOTE since I don’t know what’s the question and it
>>>> seems to be missing some details (see my questions above).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
>>>>
>>>> PS: It’s sad that we are so late on the design of visible save since
>> we’ve
>>>> had months to plan this. It was already put in a roadmap at least 6
>> months
>>>> ago and then not finished and then put again in the roadmap several
>> months
>>>> ago. We could have had plenty of time to discuss/tune this. Now this
>> means
>>>> we are at risk of not finishing this for 10.5. Let’s hope we can catch
>> up.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Caty
