Hi Adrian,
agreed! ;-)

I will try to change them all.
I think the example was not explicitly saying "hey this is the pattern
to follow for future screens!". Having all TabBar menu in the pre-body
will be far more visible.

-Bruno

2009/11/22 Adrian Crum <[email protected]>:
> That would be great!
>
> The pre-body section was created for the tab bar when IE 7 came out. The tab 
> bar style had a negative margin to move it over the padding in the main 
> content area. But IE7 would paint the padding over the tab bar. So I created 
> the pre-body section and removed the negative margin from the tab bar style. 
> I changed a few screens as an example, but so far no one else has worked on 
> changing the other screens.
>
> -Adrian
>
> --- On Sat, 11/21/09, Bruno Busco <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> From: Bruno Busco <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: Layout Problems
>> To: [email protected]
>> Date: Saturday, November 21, 2009, 4:49 PM
>> Hi Adrian,
>> finally I followed your hint about the pre-body section.
>> I found that several screens had the TabBar in the pre-body
>> section so
>> I think we should change all other to follow the same
>> pattern.
>>
>> In Revision: 883020 I have moved several TabBar menus from
>> the body to
>> the pre-body and now the rendering is much better in both
>> single and
>> mul-colums layouts.
>>
>> If this is OK (may be a little adjustment is necessary on
>> the TabBar
>> margins to have it exactly as it was befor in other themes)
>> I will go
>> further changing al other screens.
>>
>> Is it OK with you?
>>
>> -Bruno
>>
>>
>>
>> 2009/11/16 Adrian Crum <[email protected]>:
>> > Bruno,
>> >
>> > Did you notice that the GlobalDecorator already has a
>> pre-body section?
>> >
>> > -Adrian
>> >
>> > Bruno Busco wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Adam,
>> >> I will definitively put back the "new feature" in
>> a different way that
>> >> does not hurt.
>> >>
>> >> The "new feature" basically is the application tab
>> bar at an higher
>> >> level in the HTML so that it is rendered in the
>> Dropping crumbs theme
>> >> (I think I should find a better name for this
>> theme) just below the
>> >> breadcrumb.
>> >>
>> >> It will take some time and probably some
>> discussion because I will ask
>> >> details.
>> >> I look forward to the community collabotation.
>> >>
>> >> -Bruno
>> >>
>> >> 2009/11/16 Adam Heath <[email protected]>:
>> >>>
>> >>> Bilgin Ibryam wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Adam Heath wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Adrian Crum wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Developers,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Please be careful when changing
>> HTML element compounds. The recent
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> changes to certain themes are breaking
>> the layout of the Flat Grey
>> >>>>> theme - which shouldn't have been
>> affected.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Um, huh?  So, because *new* things
>> were done, possibly adding more
>> >>>>> features, but it broke something else,
>> you want to stop the new
>> >>>>> feature?  Why not just fix the thing
>> that broke?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> I'm a little confused now, because in
>> OFBiz Committers Roles and
>> >>>> Responsibilities is written this:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> *Rule #1 for a committer is the same as
>> for a doctor:* *first do no
>> >>>> harm*. Nothing should be committed that
>> breaks existing functionality
>> >>>> without replacing it either before or in
>> the same commit.
>> >>>
>> >>> Sure.  But we are all human, and we are not
>> perfect.
>> >>>
>> >>> Mistakes happen, in both directions.  If
>> someone breaks existing
>> >>> functionality, then either back out their
>> change, or fix the existing
>> >>> code to make it work.
>> >>>
>> >>> In this case, I think that maybe just backing
>> out the changes was the
>> >>> wrong approach to take.  Unless they will
>> come back at some point,
>> >>> with whatever problems fixed that they
>> caused.
>> >>>
>> >>> ps: I haven't actually looked at the changes
>> in question.
>> >>>
>> >>>> Bilgin
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to