Page Comparison

[08:14:49 CDT(-0500)] <anky> Justin_o: hi
[08:19:11 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anky: hello..
[08:19:54 CDT(-0500)] <anky> i had sent you a mail, have implemented a very small and basic mediawiki theme with fss and UIO
[08:20:38 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anky: was just about to read that e-mail
[08:20:43 CDT(-0500)] <anky> ok
[08:24:07 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anky: so i don't think you need to worry too much about using a dialog.. the new ui options designs have removed the dialog and use something like a drop down instead
[08:24:34 CDT(-0500)] <anky> ok Justin_o but would still try and remove the error
[08:24:55 CDT(-0500)] <anky> Justin_o: also i am almost done with wordpress theme, would upload it in 2 hours or so
[08:25:01 CDT(-0500)] <anky> almost there
[08:25:55 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anky: cool.. looking forward to seeing your progress
[08:26:10 CDT(-0500)] <anky> ya would update you soon on it
[08:26:19 CDT(-0500)] <anky> had an amazing weekend in firefox party
[08:26:26 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anky: nice.. how did it go
[08:29:34 CDT(-0500)] <anky> it went amazing, we made 8 extensions, they would soon be done and uploaded
[08:30:13 CDT(-0500)] <anky> we were like 12 people, most of them newbies(freshers), it was a great experience, everybody hacking together in a room and discussing
[08:34:01 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anky: sounds like a lot of fun.. what type of extensions did you make?
[08:34:30 CDT(-0500)] <anky> they were very basic, we had like 6-7 ideas
[08:35:06 CDT(-0500)] <anky> here is one of them hosted which my friend made https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/socialize-extension-for-fir/
[08:35:23 CDT(-0500)] <anky> i would soon give you the link of others, once they wer uploaded
[08:44:09 CDT(-0500)] <anky> Justin_o: did you see the mediawiki ?
[08:47:06 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anky: yes saw it... i guess not a lot there at the moment
[08:47:35 CDT(-0500)] <anky> no there is not a lot, jus a basic using fl-col and UI options, just to get the whole picture of how to use them
[08:52:32 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anky: it looks like there are some problems with the javascript.. if i'm reading it correctly... for example the uiOptionsNode is out of scope.. which would explain your error for it
[08:55:04 CDT(-0500)] <anky> ya Justin_o i had figured that out, jus did not get time, once i am done with wordpress, so would work on the error
[08:55:21 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anky: okay
[09:15:26 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: take a look at this http://blog.jquery.com/2011/04/15/jquery-16-beta-1-released/
[09:16:33 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: Mmm: #8593 Fixes an issue where DOM 0 event handlers are called twice when a separate handler is attached via jQuery
[09:19:56 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: here is the roadmap for the releases http://docs.jquery.com/Roadmap
[09:20:11 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: i think that issue you mentioned above is supposedly IE only
[09:23:09 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: I see. So then I guess we will be upgrading to 1.6?
[09:24:12 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: possibly
[09:24:17 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> we'll probably have to talk about that
[09:24:24 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> and it will depend on when they and we release
[09:26:48 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: Ok. I will run the beta and see if it fixes the problem.
[09:27:15 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: btw, interesting how turning $(this) to this fixes that event counts
[09:27:32 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: thanks
[09:27:37 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: what was that change?
[09:28:10 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: $(this).focus(); to this.focus();, line 415 Reorderer.js
[09:30:13 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: interesting.. i think there was a comment somewhere that you were showing me the other day about how "this" was changed to point at the correct value or something
[09:32:58 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: mm I will look for that, don't remember where that was....
[09:33:31 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: that passes only the 'click' test though, the 'focus' test still fails with the count = 2
[09:34:24 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: interesting
[09:34:33 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> not sure what's going on exactly
[09:37:30 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: ditto, backtracing on that test case now.
[10:03:39 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: another note is after changing $(this) to this, FF fails but chrome pass.
[10:04:00 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o>
[10:04:12 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: the count on ff is now 0 while chrome says 1 which is right. Swapping back to $(this), FF reads 1 which is right, but chrome says 2 which is wrong.
[10:04:19 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> it's so hard to know what "this" actually is.. i wonder if it's different in the different browsers
[10:04:46 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: let me run it in IE and see what I get
[10:04:57 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: i wonder if we can not use "this", can we change it to something else entirely.. so that we know what it is
[10:05:05 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: hopefully it's not 3
[10:05:21 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o>
[10:07:15 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: lol. Btw 1.6b didn't fix it.
[10:07:37 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: thanks for checking
[10:07:54 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: under what circumstances should we use $(this)? I am getting a 'null' from $(this)
[10:08:17 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: in general we don't use "this" at all
[10:08:34 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> because in js it's ambiguous as to what "this" actually is
[10:10:21 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: ok, let me try changing all this to that.
[10:11:01 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> harriswong: okay.. "that" is a convention we use.. so make sure that it is what you want in all circumstances.. if that makes anysense
[10:12:46 CDT(-0500)] <harriswong> Justin_o: ok.
[10:13:59 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: does this sound okay to you to be written in the release notes "fss-layout.css borrow hidden styles from HTML5 Boilerplate"
[10:14:11 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> it would refer to some styling that has a public domain license
[10:14:59 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Justin_o: change borrow to borrows; would "HTML5 Boilerplate" be or be accompanied by a link to something relevant?
[10:15:21 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: yes "https://github.com/paulirish/html5-boilerplate/blob/master/README.md (Public Domain)"
[10:15:45 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Justin_o, does "hidden styles" refer to styles that are hidden, or styles that are for hiding things?
[10:15:58 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> styles that are for hiding things
[10:16:32 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> I might change it to "fss-layout.css borrows some style (related to hiding content) from..."
[10:16:39 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> make that "styles" i.e. plural
[10:16:43 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Justin_o: ^
[10:16:43 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: i'm wondering if borrow(s) is the correct word.. i wonder if we should say uses or incorporates instead
[10:16:50 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> ah
[10:17:02 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> hm
[10:17:32 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> probably one of those to would be better than borrow; I'd choose uses, Justin_o
[10:17:43 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: thanks
[10:17:46 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> mp
[10:17:50 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> np
[10:18:07 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac:
[10:41:44 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: hello
[10:42:40 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> hey Justin_o, just got in, and just looking at yr comments now. i think for the !important issue, i left the styling of the list items for the list item issue, cos i knew i had fixed them there
[10:43:17 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: is there an order that the pull requests should be applied in?
[10:43:33 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o not really no
[10:44:28 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: so which jira is the styling fixed in?
[10:44:30 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> sorry about the issue over-lap... that's weird. maybe i should make a new clone, something's up
[10:45:10 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o FLUID-4173
[10:49:20 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: thanks... did you want to change the comment in the release notes for FLUID-4181 or should i just do that
[10:49:34 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o please do, thanks
[10:49:48 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: also are you going to try to rebuild the branches or did you want me to just cherry-pick them
[10:50:27 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o um, cherry pick i guess. is that easy to do?
[10:53:37 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: yah.. it's not too bad.. it does make a new commit, but it will keep you as the author and I can get it to reference the original commit too
[10:53:48 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> ok thanks
[10:58:41 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: did you get the styles from HTML5 Boilerplates v1.0 release or some in progress release
[10:58:42 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> ?
[10:58:56 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o the latest release on their site
[10:59:07 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> let me check
[11:01:04 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o yes 1.0
[11:01:21 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: thanks
[11:07:32 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> jessm does making the small blurb/link to the masters program make sense as a box on the right instead of in the main content? i think that could be good, and style it to stand out a bit more
[11:23:34 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> heidi_: let's see what it looks like
[11:23:47 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> jessm cool, i'll try it
[11:36:35 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> heidi_: do you think a "Twitter" heading over the left-most column and a moving the "project updates" over just the project news makes sense?
[11:36:53 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> or a header for both of project updates and then sub headings of twitter and news?
[11:37:50 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> jessm jameswy suggested getting rid of those headers and just having the one and adding twitter icons to the twitter updates
[11:38:01 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> did you like it better the way it is on the live site tho?
[11:38:09 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> *do you
[11:40:27 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> i dunno heidi_
[11:40:41 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> i think the twitter icons might be nice
[11:40:49 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> jessm yeah let's see how they look..
[11:40:53 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> but i also like for each column to have a heading
[11:41:10 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> or else all columns under 1 uniform heading
[11:41:17 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> on the live site we have 3 columns
[11:41:21 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> heidi_: on dev we've 2
[11:41:42 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> jessm yeah 2 with one heading
[11:53:35 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> michelled_: Justin_o: just accepted an email to infusion-users list re: a reorderer demo not working in IE 9
[11:53:51 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> i don't have IE9 to try it out
[11:54:25 CDT(-0500)] <michelled_> thx jessm - I think Justin_o is already on it
[11:55:36 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> michelled_, jessm: just writing up a reply now
[11:55:47 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> oh cool
[12:12:35 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: wondering if you've had a chance to look at my latest updates for FLUID-3880
[12:13:25 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o i read your comments, but haven't tested. still wasn't sure about uploader
[12:13:45 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> when i tested it by adding files and tabbing to the queue, they weren't focusing - do they now?
[12:13:59 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: hmm.. they should have been all along..
[12:14:07 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> i believe it has it's own css for that
[12:14:25 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o it used to focus tho
[12:18:55 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> Justin_o: did our release notes mention the limitation that Giovanni ran into? i seem to remember they did
[12:20:25 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jessm: hmm.. not really https://github.com/fluid-project/infusion/tree/infusion-1.3.1
[12:21:01 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> the browser support chart had a note that IE 9 and FF4 wouldn't be a-grade till after the final versions were released.. the readme doesn't seem to mention that
[12:24:22 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> Justin_o: eek
[12:25:53 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jessm: yes... an unfortunate omission
[12:30:02 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Hey Bosmon
[12:30:10 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Hi, colinclark
[12:30:13 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> So we need to get the Uploader squared away this week
[12:30:20 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> I have three things on the list
[12:30:40 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> 1. Tweak and push harriswong and mlam's work on the error handler message view. I'll do that one.
[12:30:50 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> 2. Come up with a strategy for options chewing
[12:30:58 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> 3. Mock XHR and jQuery file upload support
[12:31:09 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> #1 and #2 are blockers for the release
[12:31:59 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> ok
[12:32:15 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> I should look at #2 and #3, in some particular order
[12:32:28 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> I have had #3 on my plate for a while, but have done nothing so far
[12:34:01 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> Bosmon: while you're here, you have a few moments to talk about the integration tests?
[12:34:09 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Sure, mlam
[12:34:22 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Okay, I'll start on #1 and we can perhaps meet in the middle on #3.
[12:34:51 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> Ok, I think i'm almost squared away with the HTML5 tests , and i've made progress on testing the demo.
[12:35:05 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> I just need a couple pointers to finish off my portion of the HTML5 tests
[12:36:43 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Cool
[12:36:48 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Do you want to point me at some code?
[12:37:00 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> https://github.com/mlam/infusion/blob/FLUID-4163/src/webapp/tests/component-tests/uploader/js/UploaderTests.js On line 249 of the test file, i have a function that tests the file handler based on xhr's state. Is a test of this sort even necessary once a real mock xhr object is created?
[12:38:40 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> I'm thinking of leaving it as a placeholder so that once the mock XHR is in place, the call to the mockXHR and setting the properties could go into my fluid.uploader.html5Strategy.createMockXHR function on line 234
[12:38:47 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Well, the test looks like it tests something useful... why would you get rid of it?
[12:39:10 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> To me it looks like it checks the linkage between the state of the XHR and the file's status
[12:39:20 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> Yes, so you think that test should stay?
[12:40:12 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> I was just wondering because we can test this once the mock XHR is in place
[12:40:32 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Well, there is a separate and useful role for both unit tests and integration tests
[12:40:44 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Both need to exist, and both test different things
[12:40:52 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Of course, unit tests can be invoked as part of integration tests
[12:40:59 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> Ok, cool.
[12:41:18 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> But every test which exercises some part of the implementation code, tests something useful
[12:42:25 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> You're still planning to reorganise the test cases at the bottom of the file so they are more orthogonal?
[12:42:33 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Right now it's hard to tell by eye which combinations you have tested
[12:42:39 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Whereas really you should just be testing all of them
[12:42:47 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> I think we talked about using a "for" loop last week
[12:42:58 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> So in my test (again, refactoring will be done), starting at line 297, i have tested, adding files, removing files, trigger the actual upload , and stopping. do you think that is enough coverage?
[12:42:59 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> What do you mean by "orthogonal," Bosmon?
[12:43:15 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> ^^ +1
[12:43:16 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> I mean, that all tests should be issued against all configurations of all strategies of the uploader
[12:43:30 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> That is, you should loop over configurations and test cases "orthogonally"
[12:43:46 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Without there being a link between one side (configurations) and the other (tests)
[12:44:06 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Cool
[12:44:14 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> That way, if a new configuration, or a new test appears, it is easy to see what should be updated
[12:44:49 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Does that make sense?
[12:45:41 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> Yah, it does.
[12:46:30 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> michelled_ and cindyli: Sorry I missed standup this morning, but I'm wondering if you have a quick sec to update me on where you're at with UI Options?
[12:46:34 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> so Bosmon, do you think I have enough coverage?
[12:47:13 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Yes, it looks reasonable
[12:47:35 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> So long as you make sure to issue the "checkHTML5Uploader" cases against the Flash configuration too
[12:47:35 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> Ok, so i'm hoping to finish the demo and html5 today
[12:47:44 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> Yes, I'm working towards that
[12:47:50 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> so that was my next question
[12:49:06 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> I'm not sure how I would properly test the Flash configuration. ie. how to account for the calls to flash. I don't know where to begin with mocking swfupload
[12:49:31 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Well, perhaps you could mock something a bit "larger" than swfupload for now, that is easier to mock?
[12:49:58 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> If you can't test with the real remote strategy for now, perhaps you can make a mock of it
[12:50:07 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> The demo remote should do the trick
[12:50:18 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> It's essentially a mock SWFUpload, but at a somewhat higher level of granularity
[12:50:33 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Sounds good
[12:50:41 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> In terms of actually mocking SWFUpload, I can imagine it would work quite a bit like making a mock XHR
[12:50:55 CDT(-0500)] <michelled_> colinclark: cindyli and I worked together a bit this morning. she has been separating pulling the controls out of UI Options into a separate renderer component.
[12:51:08 CDT(-0500)] <michelled_> cindyli: how is that going?
[12:51:11 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> I think, actually, that with a mock XHR and a mock SWFUpload, we could ditch the demo remote altogether. But in the meantime, the demo remote should do the trick.
[12:51:14 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> I would also need a mock local then, right? since there are direct flash calls with adding and remove files from the queue
[12:51:33 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> michelled_: Cool. What parts of UI Options are you working on ?
[12:51:43 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> mlam: Those you'd mock comparably to how you must be mocking the XHR now, no?
[12:51:47 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> colinclark and michelled_, i'm re-constructing the top component "uioptions" and its sub-component "controls", they were sharing the same whole container before, the re-construction will make the sub-component "controls" only uses "controls" container. this change breaks the reder that worked before.
[12:52:28 CDT(-0500)] <michelled_> right now I'm making the textfield slider into an autoinit component
[12:52:56 CDT(-0500)] <michelled_> it should probably be a renderer component too - I'm doing it in small steps
[12:53:46 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> cindyli: okay, that sounds good
[12:53:51 CDT(-0500)] <michelled_> cindyli: I've made a branch on my github fork and I'll be pushing to that soon
[12:54:03 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> So, michelled_ and cindyli you'll meet in the middle at some point?
[12:54:07 CDT(-0500)] <michelled_> we can integrate our work tomorrow
[12:54:18 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> colinclark: hmmm, i'll give it a shot.
[12:54:23 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> michelled_: ok. i was intended to use the autoInit on the rederer component at the same time pulling out of "controls", seems i was too ambitous. various extra errors occurred. so, i'm switching back calling init creator myself
[12:54:51 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> Bosmon: Thanks for looking over the HTML5 tests. It'll all be cleaned up when you next look at them
[12:55:31 CDT(-0500)] <michelled_> cindyli: that's good - it's a lot easier to work in small steps
[12:55:49 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> michelled_: agree
[12:56:56 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> So, mlam, to be more specific
[12:56:57 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> mlam: col
[12:57:10 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Looking at your code, you have a kind of "mock browse button" there
[12:57:22 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> At line 305 of your tests
[12:57:27 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> you create an array of files
[12:57:37 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> then you fire the appropriate Uploader event
[12:57:39 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> and off it goes
[12:57:54 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> You'll need to create a mock for SWFUpload that is comparable to this
[12:57:58 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> Yes
[12:58:13 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> So that it will respond to whatever methods are necessary
[12:59:03 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> So, it looks like the Flash local calls three methods on SWFUpload
[12:59:22 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> One of them, in fact, will never be called in a Flash 10 scenario (selectFile(), that is)
[12:59:43 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> So you need to mock cancel and the setBrowseButtonDisabled calls
[13:01:01 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Is this making some sense?
[13:02:27 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> I'm just thinking through.... I'm just trying to think of ways to avoid the testing the test type scenario
[13:03:05 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> The key is to test the Uploader, not the thing you're mocking
[13:04:02 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> the setBrowseButtonDisabled calls to flash can be mocked up as an empty function, right? since we don't want it to really do anything
[13:04:18 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> yep, exactly
[13:05:19 CDT(-0500)] <mlam> Ok, cool.
[13:07:52 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Justin_o: So that Grid Reorderer bug in IE9...
[13:08:08 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Did we know about it during 1.3.1 QA? Is there a JIRA for it?
[13:12:12 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> colinclark: http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-3963
[13:12:55 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> So is it actually related to jQuery UI?
[13:13:23 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> colinclark: i believe so yes, that's why it's working again now.. since we've upgraded to the latest version of jquery ui
[13:21:40 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> ok
[14:31:08 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: is there documenation on fss-reset on the wiki?
[14:31:26 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Justin_o, there is mention of it
[14:31:26 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: or fl-focus
[14:31:36 CDT(-0500)] * anastasiac digs up references
[14:31:42 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: not fl-focus, :focus in fss-reset
[14:32:09 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> ah, no, I suspect not. The docs for fss-reset are just a general description of the purpose of the file, in general
[14:32:18 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> there's no discussion of the specifics of what's inside the file, Justin_o
[14:32:29 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: thanks
[14:49:17 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> heidi_ and Justin_o: jessm sent along this interesting site with examples of CSS3 media query-based designs: http://mediaqueri.es/
[14:49:42 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cool, will check it out
[14:50:38 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> After Infusion 1.4, we should spend some time strategizing about how CSS3-specific features might fit into FSS
[14:51:10 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> And, for example, how CSS3 column layouts relate to FSS columns, etc.
[14:58:40 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> hey y'all – is y'all on everyone's alerts??
[14:58:44 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> http://www.jessicaledbetter.com/programming-challenges/
[14:59:06 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> if you like typing challenges, maybe you'll like programming challenges
[15:23:49 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> michelled_: just pushed changes into my github for ui options that separate out the "controls" container and fix the page rendering. the renderer component "controls" is not auto inited yet, and the collaboration between the text slider and preview window is still broken. My next step is to fix the collaboration
[15:24:11 CDT(-0500)] <michelled_> that's great cindyli!
[15:24:16 CDT(-0500)] <michelled_> thanks for letting me know
[15:24:21 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> np