Closed
Bug 1230212
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
Implement updated design spec for XUL alerts
Categories
(Toolkit :: Themes, defect)
Toolkit
Themes
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla46
People
(Reporter: jaws, Assigned: jaws)
References
Details
Attachments
(3 files, 1 obsolete file)
164.30 KB,
image/png
|
Details | |
5.40 KB,
patch
|
lina
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
5.49 KB,
patch
|
ritu
:
approval-mozilla-aurora+
ritu
:
approval-mozilla-beta+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → jaws
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Component: DOM: Push Notifications → Themes
Product: Core → Toolkit
Summary: Implement updated spec for push notifications UI design → Implement updated design spec for XUL alerts
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
phlsa: let's go with 80x80 px
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
This updates to the new spec, as well as fixes the spacing for non-web notifications such as the Update Available notification that Firefox shows on its own (fixed by the addition of the `:not([hasOrigin])` selector).
I also fixed the color of the gear to match the color of the close button, which is greyscale on Windows 8 and 10+. I didn't add a section to keep it blue-ish on other versions of Windows, but I can if you'd like.
Attachment #8695430 -
Flags: review?(MattN+bmo)
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8695430 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch
Review of attachment 8695430 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
::: toolkit/themes/shared/alert-common.css
@@ +53,5 @@
> }
> }
>
> #alertImage {
> + width: 80px;
I thought we agree to make this a maximum to not upscale? Also, why don't we have a max-height anymore? What's stopping me from making an image that's 80px wide but 1000px high?
@@ +70,5 @@
> width: 255px;
> }
>
> +#alertBox:not([hasImage]) > box > #alertTextBox {
> + padding-inline-start: 8px;
Where did this number come from? I see 8px in the spec for the title without a favicon but this is for the body text.
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
Interdiff:
> diff --git a/toolkit/themes/shared/alert-common.css b/toolkit/themes/shared/alert-common.css
> --- a/toolkit/themes/shared/alert-common.css
> +++ b/toolkit/themes/shared/alert-common.css
> @@ -50,16 +50,20 @@
> }
>
> #alertImage {
> width: 80px;
> + height: 80px;
> + max-width: 80px;
> + max-height: 80px;
> + object-fit: scale-down;
> margin: 0 7px 7px;
> }
>
> .alertTextBox {
(In reply to Matthew N. [:MattN] from comment #3)
> I thought we agree to make this a maximum to not upscale? Also, why don't we
> have a max-height anymore? What's stopping me from making an image that's
> 80px wide but 1000px high?
Yes, that's right. I added the above changes to make sure that the box is always 80x80 and that we won't distort the image when drawing in the box.
>
> @@ +70,5 @@
> > width: 255px;
> > }
> >
> > +#alertBox:not([hasImage]) > box > #alertTextBox {
> > + padding-inline-start: 8px;
>
> Where did this number come from? I see 8px in the spec for the title without
> a favicon but this is for the body text.
This was an eye test where I had to adjust the numbers pixel by pixel to get it to look right.
Attachment #8695430 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8695430 -
Flags: review?(MattN+bmo)
Attachment #8698120 -
Flags: review?(MattN+bmo)
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Attachment #8698120 -
Flags: review?(MattN+bmo) → review?(kcambridge)
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8698120 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v1.1
Review of attachment 8698120 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Looks good!
::: toolkit/themes/shared/alert-common.css
@@ +67,2 @@
> /* The text box width is increased to make up for the lack of image when one
> + is not provided. 333px is the text box width when a picture is present,
Where does the 333px come in?
@@ +74,5 @@
> width: 255px;
> }
>
> +#alertBox:not([hasImage]) > box > #alertTextBox {
> + padding-inline-start: 8px;
Neat, I didn't know about this property. Are you using it because we might have RTL text?
Attachment #8698120 -
Flags: review?(kcambridge) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Kit Cambridge [:kitcambridge] from comment #5)
> Comment on attachment 8698120 [details] [diff] [review]
> Patch v1.1
>
> Review of attachment 8698120 [details] [diff] [review]:
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Looks good!
>
> ::: toolkit/themes/shared/alert-common.css
> @@ +67,2 @@
> > /* The text box width is increased to make up for the lack of image when one
> > + is not provided. 333px is the text box width when a picture is present,
>
> Where does the 333px come in?
Ah, I forgot to update that comment. It should be 349px in that line, which is explained in the following line.
> @@ +74,5 @@
> > width: 255px;
> > }
> >
> > +#alertBox:not([hasImage]) > box > #alertTextBox {
> > + padding-inline-start: 8px;
>
> Neat, I didn't know about this property. Are you using it because we might
> have RTL text?
Yeah, this is to help us support RTL text, which should be done by default.
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•10 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/fx-team/rev/6a2ad662612370d248530465d690785c20abcf0b
Bug 1230212 - Implement updated design spec for XUL alerts. r=kitcambridge
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
status-firefox44:
--- → affected
status-firefox45:
--- → affected
Comment 8•10 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
status-firefox46:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla46
Comment hidden (duplicate, typo) |
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•10 years ago
|
||
Approval Request Comment
[Feature/regressing bug #]: implemented finished design for push notifications shipping in firefox 44
[User impact if declined]: push notifications will change UI designs after 44 ships, and 44 will ship with a less-than-ideal UI that has improper margins, spacing, and extra noise
[Describe test coverage new/current, TreeHerder]: visual UI changes, no tests, on m-c for > 3 days now
[Risks and why]: none expected, CSS and SVG changes only
[String/UUID change made/needed]: none
Attachment #8700673 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Attachment #8700673 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Assignee | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Attachment #8698120 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Attachment #8698120 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Comment 11•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8700673 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch for Aurora45 and Beta44
Visual fit and finish for push notifications, Beta44+, Aurora45+
Attachment #8700673 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Attachment #8700673 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta+
Attachment #8700673 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Attachment #8700673 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora+
tracking-firefox44:
--- → +
Comment 12•10 years ago
|
||
bugherder uplift |
Comment 13•10 years ago
|
||
bugherder uplift |
Comment 14•10 years ago
|
||
bugherder uplift |
status-b2g-v2.5:
--- → fixed
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•