[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.
Manage space
Manage content
Integrations