Alas, our MyUW repo is private, so that GitHub URL will be difficult for
most folks to see.
Here's that commit in .diff and .patch formats as a public Gist:
https://gist.github.com/apetro/459fca11e2cd7c016eeb
Andrew
On 5/8/14, 8:27 AM, Tim Levett wrote:
We (UW) actually did this in our fork. I wasn't sure if the community would
want it, but if you want to check it out its right here:
https://github.com/UW-Madison-DoIT/uPortal/commit/82a109b33d4007b68586edd70b7800fbe2af217a
Basically just changes container to container-fluid. We needed to do this because we
added a custom region called "global-sidebar-left" which is for a slide out
page level menu on medium/small screens. If others are interested I can post a PR on
master for it.
- Tim
On 05-07-14, Drew Wills wrote:
I am okay with the proposal.
FWIW I had previously been thinking we should talk about either going this
direction or at least widening the fixed width.
drew
On 05/07/2014 10:42 AM, James Wennmacher wrote:
Hi,
I propose that we change the Respondr theme to be fluid width (e.g. full
width) instead of the fixed-width format where Bootstrap have a
fixed-width for the rows and centers the content in the viewport for
devices >= 768px (see http://getbootstrap.com/css/#grid). We can
consider asking the uportal-user community, but from talking to a few
people it seems there was not a strong design decision to limit the
viewing to the fixed-widths<http://getbootstrap.com/css/#grid>. I
personally have found it annoying and limiting. Bootstrap's main site
uses fixed-width and so do many other bootstrap sites, but I'm told many
other bootstrap sites do not.
Advantages of full width:
* Can display more information wider, especially with the
preponderance of wide-screen monitors where height is often limited
so you do more vertical scrolling.
* With Bootstrap's general tendency to make items bigger so they are
more easily accessed by a finger on a mobile device, on a desktop
and some landscape-oriented tablets it would be helpful to have the
greater width to display content since you typically have 2 or more
columns.
* Puts Respondr on-par with Universality in this aspect.
Disadvantages of full width:
* If you are restricted to widths of <750px, 750px, 970px, and 1170px
it makes testing easier since you don't have to figure out how to
handle widths outside that restricted set.
To use full width is actually very easy. We replace the class
'container' with 'container-fluid' on the markup generated by the XSL.
We could make it fairly easy to configure in the XSL with a default of
full width.
Thoughts?
--
You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as:
arch...@mail-archive.com
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
