fluid-work IRC Logs-2011-10-04

[08:14:20 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli michelled i can take a look at 4500 - UIO styling bug

[08:14:37 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> thx heidi_

[08:15:10 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> thanks, heidi_, i will give a dig too

[08:18:22 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli michelled i've got a fix - i'll send a pull req

[08:18:39 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> not sure how this bug happened, but this should do it

[08:18:40 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> awesome, thanks, heidi_

[08:19:48 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> just checking it on some other browsers

[08:20:51 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: i can review your pull request, could you please let me know after you send it?

[08:21:15 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o will do. i wonder if FF6 treats padding differently than 3.6

[08:21:34 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> it's much different than safari

[08:21:58 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: really.. in what way?

[08:23:47 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o not sure... something's different

[08:25:57 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o there seems to be some other styling issues now as well - particularly when font size is made larger. any guesses as to when these were introduced?

[08:28:03 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: my first guess would be when we changed the stuff around line spacing

[08:28:22 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> but i haven't investigated the code, so am not too sure

[08:31:46 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli michelled fyi there seem to be some other styling issues when font size is large so i'll try to fix that too

[08:32:03 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> thanks, heidi_

[08:37:25 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> michelled, a question about the text fields in the UIO sliders: Should users be able to enter a decimal number less than 1 without a leading 0 and still have it be considered a number? e.g. .5 instead of 0.5

[08:38:42 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> hm. heidi_, jameswy, can you comment on my question, just above? ^

[08:39:15 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> anastasiac i think the range is 1x to 2x

[08:39:41 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> yes, but my question is: should .5 be treated as an invalid number, or an invalid string? the results are different

[08:39:49 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy> anastasiac: Let's make anything with a leading decimal an invalid value

[08:39:58 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy> Ah, didn't realize that.

[08:40:08 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy> How are we treating invalid numbers different than strings?

[08:40:19 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> strings are ignored completely, but numbers less than the minimum set the value to the minimum

[08:41:10 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy> Right.

[08:41:33 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy> Let's have it treated as an invalid number, and be consistent about it throughout.

[08:41:37 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> anastasiac it should set to 1 i would think

[08:41:46 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy> Exactly.

[08:42:18 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> ok, thanks. That's what I was expecting to happen. So: .5 counts as a number, and if it's entered and is less than the minimum, then the value should be set to the minimum, right

[08:42:19 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> ?

[08:42:54 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> anastasiac right

[08:42:56 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> thanks

[08:46:00 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: is that what happens?

[08:46:31 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Justin_o, right now it's treating it as a string and ignoring it, so it is NOT behaving as jameswy and heidi_ recommend. I was going to file it as a minor bug.

[08:47:25 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: okay, thanks

[08:47:38 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Justin_o: http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-4501

[08:50:15 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> fluid-everyone: just a heads up that after the fix for FLUID-4500 we'll have to restart UIO testing

[08:51:48 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Justin_o, does that mean re-doing test plans that were completed?

[08:52:32 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: unfortunately yes

[09:06:34 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o i'm noticing a scrollbar for fat panel in IE8

[09:07:16 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> or maybe it was something i just added...

[09:10:22 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o no it's there in master as well.... blocker?

[09:10:53 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> sounds like something that was mentioned yesterday

[09:11:07 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> oh was that the thing you mentioned about fl-fix

[09:11:26 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o no that was something else

[09:11:37 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o are the scrollbars there in IE9 as well

[09:11:57 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: hmm okay, not sure.. just in a meeting at the moment, but i can try to check later.. or maybe anastasiac can confirm

[09:12:13 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> sure, I'll have a look

[09:12:22 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> heidi_, ie8 in win7 or xp?

[09:12:50 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> anastasiac xp

[09:13:07 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> and wondering if it happens in win7/IE9 as well

[09:13:11 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> oh, you want me to check IE8 or IE9? and horizontal or vertical, heidi_?

[09:13:20 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> ok, I'll check everything I have

[09:13:31 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> anastasiac vertical scrollbar on far right when opening fat panel

[09:13:40 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> k

[09:13:53 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> anastasiac for 'links and buttons'

[09:14:36 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> heidi_: IE9 on Win7: There is a scollbar there briefly, but the fat panel enlarges until it's big enough and the scollbar goes away

[09:15:12 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> hm, i guess that's ok.

[09:15:15 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> and IE8?

[09:17:04 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> heidi_: IE8 on Win 7: scrollbars on links & buttons and on layout & navigation; trying xp next (takes time to shut down a vm and start another)

[09:17:14 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> and clear cookies

[09:17:28 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> anastasiac thanks for checking... yeah that's not good to have those vert scrollbars by default

[09:17:40 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o jameswy is that a blocker

[09:17:59 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> it's too bad all these styling bugs got in...hm

[09:18:28 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> heidi_: IE8 on XP: scrollbars

[09:18:33 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> ie7 next...

[09:18:44 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> thanks anastasiac - could you file a bug for this?

[09:18:52 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> sure

[09:18:57 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> thanks!

[09:19:22 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> i wonder if it's something Bosmon2's window resizer thing can fix?

[09:19:25 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy> heidi_, anastasiac, Justin_o: doesn't sound like a blocker to me. It's just there temporarily until the expansion is complete?

[09:19:35 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> IE7 same as IE9: brief scrollbars that go away when fat panel resizes

[09:19:40 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> I wouldn't think it's a blocker

[09:19:53 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> jameswy no that's just for IE9 ... for IE8 scrollbars stays... sounds like that's the only browser tho

[09:20:00 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> jameswy, in IE8 there's no expansion: the scrollbar stays, but everything is still visible

[09:20:09 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> maybe a sliver of white is offscreen

[09:20:31 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy> Ah, gotcha.

[09:20:49 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy> Still don't think it's a blocker. Justin_o?

[09:20:55 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> k i'll submit my pull for 4500 for now... i think it would also be good to fix the styling issues when font-size is big tho

[09:21:22 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> wow; IE6 sucks

[09:21:31 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> but no scrollbars

[09:21:43 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jameswy: i'd agree with you

[09:22:01 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> anastasiac how sucky?

[09:22:29 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> very slow; the show/hide blue extends across the whole page; very slow

[09:22:41 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> and it's on windows

[09:28:12 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Justin_o, heidi_: http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-4502

[09:29:02 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> thanks anastasiac

[09:29:16 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o sent pull req for 4500

[09:29:30 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: thanks

[09:29:52 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o i wonder if we want to fix the styling issues for when the font size is large

[09:31:05 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> something is up now... text-style isn't working at all for me in fat panel

[09:31:09 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> in FF

[09:31:22 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> or safari

[09:31:27 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: really

[09:31:33 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> off the build site?

[09:31:43 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o no local... checking build

[09:32:49 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o works on build site... i wonder why that would be?

[09:33:07 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: are you checking the branch you submitted the pull request from locally

[09:33:11 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> or the master branch

[09:33:16 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o master

[09:33:28 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: hmm.. might be some sort of local ajax thing or something

[09:33:30 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> not too sure

[09:33:42 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> or something do with the cookie maybe

[09:34:05 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> hmm

[09:34:59 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> yeah my local one seems to have other issues as well so ignore... i'll try a fresh copy and if it's still weird maybe it's cos it's local... hm

[09:46:26 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: i'm looking at your fix.. would it be possible to get the alignment of the text and checkbox to be the same as it is on the full page uio versions

[09:48:37 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o i can try

[09:49:10 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: thanks

[09:49:34 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> the ones in the fat panel are mid aligned where as on the other pages they are more top aligned

[09:54:54 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: i added my comment to the pull request for history sake

[09:55:25 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> k

[10:00:20 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o i did a fresh clone of the master, deleted cookies, and still can't change text style... why would that be i wonder?

[10:00:23 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> locally that is

[10:01:19 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> going through localhost doesn't change that

[10:01:36 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: wondering if you have run the build

[10:01:45 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> you might have to generate the uio themes

[10:01:55 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o ahhhh yes

[10:02:27 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> yah.. that step is so easy to miss

[10:22:13 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o can't figure out this input alignment thing

[10:22:20 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> feels silly to hold up testing for it?

[10:24:07 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> tho i'm seeing something super weird.... line-height:0 is set on the labels... what the...

[10:24:21 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jameswy: do you mind if the alignment of the checkboxes isn't consistent across types of uio but it is consistent within

[10:25:14 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o can you take a look and see why there's a bizarre style body#fluid-id-3feos7q4-38.fl-uiOptions-fatPanel with line-height:0 ?

[10:25:20 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> i think that might be what's breaking everything

[10:25:26 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> on the label

[10:25:49 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> the weird part is the unique ID

[10:25:56 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> that's there probably because of rendering

[10:26:08 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli any guesses as to why a line-height:0 is set here?

[10:27:03 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> when does line-height:0 get set, heidi_?

[10:27:10 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o ignore my 4500 pull request - this is the real issue, the line height

[10:27:21 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> at the page initializing or after adjusting certain settings?

[10:27:32 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli this is default setting

[10:27:36 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> ok

[10:27:46 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> it says it's inherited from body#fluid-id-3feos7q4-38.fl-uiOptions-fatPanel

[10:27:51 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: okay

[10:29:30 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> ehi it looks like that's an inline style too

[10:29:34 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: ^

[10:29:50 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o yeah something up with line-height stuff

[10:30:29 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: i wonder if that is being set somehow by jquery ui

[10:30:39 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> hmm

[10:30:44 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> heidi_: in IE?

[10:30:52 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> cindyli: FF

[10:30:53 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli i'm using FF

[10:31:02 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> i don't see it in ff, heidi_

[10:31:18 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> inspect the label in the 3rd tab

[10:31:24 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> and scroll down

[10:31:29 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> it's an inline inherited style

[10:43:53 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli Justin_o line-height:0 is set on the iframe's body

[10:44:09 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: any idea what is setting it there?

[10:44:10 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> ya, i see it, heidi_

[10:44:12 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> it should be 1em by default - is there an error in the code for this cindyli

[10:44:21 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> i found where it's from, Justin_o, heidi_

[10:44:32 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> it's set by UIEnhancer

[10:44:35 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> easy fix cindyli? typo or miscalculation?

[10:44:43 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> not a typo

[10:45:21 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli i'll leave it to you to send a pull req for 4500 then - cool? Justin_o can review

[10:45:31 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> it's because the time that uienhancer detects the iframe body line-height is too early for iframe to gets initialized

[10:45:37 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> sure, heidi_

[10:45:39 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> ahh

[10:45:50 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> another timing issue eh

[10:45:58 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> i'm thinking what's the solution

[10:46:09 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> 1. use default 1em?

[10:46:25 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> 2. or somehow make iframe initialize earlier?

[10:46:45 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli well it should detect what the current setting is

[10:46:53 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> which enhancer is setting it, the outer or inner one?

[10:47:11 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> should be the inner, but i'm not sure

[10:49:30 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> agree with heidi_, should detect the current setting

[11:09:43 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy> Justin_o, re: timestamp 3:24 – yes, I do mind if the checkboxes aren't consistent across UIOs, even though they're consistent within the individual configurations. But you knew that already

[11:10:57 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy> But if you're asking if I think it's a blocker--it's definitely not.

[11:10:59 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jameswy: of course, but i meant is it a blocker

[11:11:04 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o>

[11:11:05 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> okay

[11:11:06 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> thanks

[11:11:17 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> i think it's the real issue anyways..

[11:12:31 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o once line height's fixed checkboxes should line up

[11:13:07 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: excellent

[11:20:46 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o cindyli can the timing thing be fixed easily-ish? need any help cindy?

[11:25:01 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> Justin_o, heidi_, i probably was wrong with the timing reason, it seems the div for iframe is set to hidden

[11:25:23 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> yes, that's correct

[11:25:25 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> once i removed the hidden style, line-height is readable

[11:25:35 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> cindyli: oh

[11:25:43 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> i'm trying to figure out where this hidden style gets added

[11:25:43 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> it needs to be hidden to start though

[11:25:49 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> understand

[11:25:59 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> just wanna experiment to confirm the cause

[11:26:02 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> cindyli: it's getting display: none

[11:26:03 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> ?

[11:26:11 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> that's because the sliding panel is closing

[11:26:14 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> Justin_o: no, display: hidden

[11:26:21 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> ah. ok

[11:26:46 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> cindyli: hmm.. display hidden.. i would have expected display: none.. so maybe something else is happenening

[11:26:48 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> sorry, u r right, display: none

[11:26:49 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> any ideas heidi_

[11:26:51 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> oh okay

[11:27:42 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> hmm... so because the div is hidden ui enhancer can't put a line height on it? i'm not sure i understand..

[11:28:17 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> or i see, the initial value is line-height 0 because it's not being displayed... is that right cindyli?

[11:28:43 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> is there a way to calc that value before the panel is closed?

[11:29:32 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> heidi_: the problem is the initial "line-height" is not readable because the div is set to "hidden"

[11:29:56 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli right... so is there a way to get the val before the panel closes?

[11:30:14 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> or recalc it when the panel is opened

[11:30:34 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> the panel is closed all the time at initialization, i think

[11:30:47 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> is it right? Justin_o

[11:32:27 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> cindyli: i think that's correct

[11:33:18 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o is there a way to expose the line height value somehow

[11:33:30 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> or signal a uie event when the panel is opened

[11:35:02 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: possibly the later..

[11:35:32 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: but it might cause some flickering

[11:35:55 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> perhaps UIO shouldn't try to set the line height until it can read some real value

[11:36:01 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> cindyli, heidi_ ^^

[11:36:48 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o but even if it's set, it's still not able to get that val

[11:37:59 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: what do you mean?

[11:38:28 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o i guess.. when can it get the val?

[11:42:58 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: i guess when the panel opens

[11:43:07 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> but i think that it shouldn't try to set it to 0 to start with either

[11:43:40 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o yeah good call, should nver be 0

[11:43:52 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> although it still might flicker a bit if you have increased the line spacing

[11:53:44 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli is that possible? ^^ not set the line height if the value doesn't exist?

[11:54:53 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> heidi_, Justin_o, about to send the pull request. i'm taking Justin_o's suggestion that don't touch line-height when it's not detectable

[11:55:11 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> since the line-height is re-set at the panel open

[11:55:17 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> we should be safe

[11:55:19 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli awesome

[11:55:27 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> cindyli: great.. looking forward to trying it out

[11:57:56 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> heidi_: btw, is negative number of "em" valid for line-height?

[11:58:09 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> like, line-height: −1em

[11:58:30 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli i don't think so no

[11:58:39 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> cool. thanks, heidi_

[11:59:08 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> cindyli confirmed, no negatives

[11:59:17 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> great, thanks.

[11:59:35 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> Justin_o, heidi_, the pull request for 4500 has been sent - https://github.com/fluid-project/infusion/pull/182

[11:59:46 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> you rock cindyli

[12:00:01 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli>

[12:00:31 CDT(-0500)] <michelled>

[12:00:50 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> that's great cindyli - can I get you to put a comment into the code explaining why we need to do that check?

[12:00:59 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> it feels like something we'll forget before long

[12:01:28 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> referring to the JIRA number is always good

[12:01:36 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> i did put a comment before that func in UIEnhanc: Return 0 when the line-height is not detectable.

[12:01:42 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> is it enough? michelled

[12:01:58 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> oh, I didn't see it in the diff on github

[12:02:14 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> ok, probably i added after push.

[12:02:23 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> give me a sec

[12:09:18 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> cindyli, michelled: I tried cindy's changes in the Safari and FF on mac and it seems to be working

[12:09:48 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> thanks, Justin_o. good to know

[12:10:30 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> thank you

[12:11:19 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> michelled, Justin_o, pushed. the pull request is ready

[12:11:30 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> to be reviewed.

[12:11:37 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> thx cindyli

[12:11:43 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> np

[12:13:26 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> cindyli: thanks.. i'll take a quick peak.. but it seems to be working fine

[12:15:53 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> cool. thanks. Justin_o

[12:19:37 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> cindyli: i think it might make sense to add another comment about the for line 487 to mention that the check there is for the fix for FLUID-4500 similar to what you have on line 364

[12:21:06 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> sure, Justin_o

[12:21:13 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> thanks

[12:24:16 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> Justin_o: pushed

[12:24:24 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> cindyli: thanks

[12:24:26 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> np

[12:38:24 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> fluid-everyone: pushed cindyli's pull request.. UIO is open for testing again

[12:38:37 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> yay!

[12:41:14 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> does anyone know a way to clear cookies in IE that doesn't take 5-6 clicks?

[12:41:20 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> jhung?

[12:41:27 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Jusin_o, maybe?

[12:42:14 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: which IE

[12:42:22 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> currently, IE9 in win7

[12:42:25 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> i think in IE8 and IE9 you can do it from the developer tools interface

[12:43:13 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> thanks, Justin_o!!

[12:43:57 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> no problem

[12:53:32 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> Justin_o: is there a JIRA for the fact that the first time you open the sliding panel is does not slide?

[12:53:36 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> FF and Chrome

[12:54:03 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> michelled: not that I'm aware of it

[12:54:24 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o i'm guessing build site has cindy's fix?

[12:54:58 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> it seems to be the sakai demo not the demo portal example Justin_o

[12:57:15 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: yes

[12:57:25 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> michelled: okay.. well.. i guess that's better

[12:57:30 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> we should still file that though..

[12:57:38 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> yep, filing it now

[12:57:39 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> maybe we should think about tossing that demo after this release

[12:57:59 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> I think colinclark still uses it to show UIO in context

[12:58:49 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> michelled: okay.. we can see if he thinks the new one will be good enough for that type of demo in the futrure

[13:00:41 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> Justin_o: http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-4503

[13:01:09 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> michelled: thanks

[13:01:16 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> np

[13:20:29 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> jameswy, why does the UIO with preview have a "reset" button, and UIO without preview has "reset and apply" ?

[13:21:14 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> or heidi_ ^

[13:21:38 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> anastasiac reset is viewable in the preview window

[13:21:49 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> for without preview, it wouldn't do anything unless it also applied

[13:22:12 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> yes, but that's the same as all the other controls, no?

[13:22:37 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> anastasiac for the controls, you change them, then click save

[13:22:47 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> reset is sort of an immediate action

[13:23:17 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> but why is it immediate without the preview but not with the preview? I'm not sure which way I think is better, but it just seems inconsistent

[13:23:58 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> anastasiac reset is an action, and the action isn't realised w/o preview unless applied. with preview, you can see it's result in the preview window

[13:24:19 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> i agree it's weirdly inconsistent but i think that's how it made sense at the time. jameswy ?

[13:25:57 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> well, I'm not quite wrapping my head around it, but I'll accept that some thought was put into it, and that it's implemented the way it was intended to be implemented

[13:29:05 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> fluid-everyone: anyone have any opions on if this is a blocker http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-4504

[13:31:22 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> Justin_o: I think it should be in known issues but not block.

[13:31:48 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> jameswy: does that seem ok to you?

[13:32:05 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Justin_o, fyi: in safari 5 on 10.7, there is focus styling

[13:32:07 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o is it just wb theme?

[13:33:24 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: that's the only one i've tried so far

[13:34:07 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: so yb as well

[13:34:12 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> the rest have a dotted black outline

[13:34:33 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> easy to fix right?

[13:35:11 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: probably

[13:35:41 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> since a11y is our priority, i would say blocker

[13:36:07 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> anastasiac: in answer to your question above about reset versus reset and apply, don't forget that integrators will choose one of those options so users will not see an inconsistency

[13:36:22 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> michelled, good point

[13:55:39 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon2> Hi cindyli - could you explain the commit title of your patch, "Ignore the line-height touch when it's not detectable."?

[13:57:05 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> Bosmon2: apparently i should have made it clearer. :-$

[13:57:47 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> with firefox, fat panel, retrieving "line-height" value with jquery gets "undefined" returned

[13:57:58 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> because the iframe div is hidden initially

[13:58:48 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> the solution in that pull request is, if "undefined" gets returned, don't touch "line-height" style

[13:59:10 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon2> I'm also wondering what the branch "times === "" " is doing there

[13:59:20 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon2> Shouldn't we insist that by the time it is used, the value "times" has become a number?

[14:00:24 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon2> Similar to "lineHeight" also

[14:00:49 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon2> I think it's an important discipline that inappropriately converted values taken from a model should be normalised as quickly as possible

[14:00:57 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon2> We ran into issues with this in the Fluid Engage days also

[14:01:08 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> agree

[14:01:29 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon2> That somehow every person's hands who a piece of model information passed through came to consider it was their problem to check whether it was "", undefined, null, or any kind of other undesirable thing

[14:03:12 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon2> My feeling is that an inappropriate value for "times" should be immediately converted to 1, and an inappropriate value for lineHeight should be treated as if it had been "normal"

[14:04:16 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> regarding line-height, i thought about it. i don't think we can treat it as "normal"

[14:04:43 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> 'cuz what if the stored setting has been applied

[14:05:01 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> treating it as "normal" would eliminate the saved setting

[14:06:01 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> so, the better way is to keep what it was until we get a real value back

[14:06:19 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> probably not the better, but the safer

[14:07:17 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon2> cindyli - how could a stored setting that was inappropriate have been applied?

[14:07:24 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon2> For example, one that was "" or undefined?

[14:07:58 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> from my discovery, it was because the div is hidden

[14:08:21 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> certainly the stored setting would not be inappropriate