Since commit dcec003d0 we're only using the menu-text class in the admin
layouts. So instead of defining styles for menu-text and then
overwriting them in the admin section, we can define them just in the
admin section.
Since we don't have <img> tags in the menu-text element in the admin
section, we can remove their styles. And we can also remove the styles
we were overriding twice (like `line-height`).
As mentioned in the previous commits, a `<select>` field which submits
its form on change causes many accessibility and usability issues, so
we're replacing it with the order links we use everywhere else.
Since the links "Id" and "Title" by themselves don't have enough
information to let users know they're used to sort by ID or title, we
have to update them somehow. We could add a "Sort by:" prefix before the
list of links (and associate it with the `aria-labelledby` attribute);
however, we don't do this anywhere else and might look weird depending
on the screen size.
So we're simply adding "Sort by" before each link.
Now that we don't use the `wide_order_selector` partial anymore, we can
remove it alongside the styles for the `select-order` class.
Using order links in this case causes an unusual interface, where we
show filter links, then information about the number of results, and
then order links.
Whether or not this makes sense needs to be confirmed with usability
tests. In any case, this is still way better than using `<select>`
fields which automatically change to a new page, since they cause
problems to keyboard users, are harder to select for touchscreen users,
might confuse screen reader users who will notice a form but no way to
submit it, and are not elements we generally use to let users choose the
order of the records.
For a more detailed explanation of these issues, check the commit
message in the commit "Use order links to sort comments and topics"
(just a few commits ago).
- Allow to define a link (text and url) on budget form for render on the budget
header.
- Improve styles
Co-authored-by: Senén Rodero Rodríguez <senenrodero@gmail.com>
So now there's no need to edit each phase individually to enable/disable
them.
We aren't doing the same thing in the form to edit a budget because we
aren't sure about possible usability issues. On one hand, in some tables
we automatically update records when we mark a checkbox, so users might
expect that. On the other hand, having a checkbox in the middle of a
form which updates the database automatically is counter-intuitive,
particularly when right below that table there are other checkboxes
which don't update the database until the form is submitted.
So, either way, chances are users would think they've updated the phases
(or kept them intact) while the opposite would be true.
In the form within the wizard to create a budget that problem isn't that
important because there aren't any other fields in the form and it's
pretty intuitive that what users do will have no effect until they press
the "Finish" button.
Co-Authored-By: Julian Nicolas Herrero <microweb10@gmail.com>
Using `currentcolor` and `color: inherit` is IMHO more expressive (we're
saying we want to use the same color as the text) and makes it easier to
customize these colors in other CONSUL installations. We also remove
duplication as we can use the same styles for both the admin and the
public layouts.
This makes the table easier to identify when writing tests and using
screen readers.
Since we do not render any other table captions anywhere else, we're
making the caption invisible so only screen reader users will be
affected by this change.
Previously the draft mode was a phase of the PB, but that had some
limitations.
Now the phase drafting disappears and therefore the PB can have the
status published or not published (in draft mode).
That will give more flexibility in order to navigate through the
different phases and see how it looks for administrators before
publishing the PB and everybody can see.
By default, the PB is always created in draft mode, so it gives you
the flexibility to adjust and modify anything before publishing it.
We're going to add help content here and having a floating button would
make the button disappear when creating content for mobile phones.
I'm not sure having the link in the <header> tag is semantically
correct, but is consistent to what we did to create local targets in the
SDG content section.
Note we're changing the style of the link to create local targets so
it's consistent with the link to create budgets/groups/headings.
Other than simplifying the view, we can write tests using `click_link`,
which makes the tests more robust. Clicking the `.icon-notification`
element was causing some tests to fail when defining a window height of
750 pixels in the `admin_budgets` branch.
* Add a header element as component markup wrapper
* Allow component to receive an optional block
* Add reusable styles for header links
Co-autored-by: Javi Martín <javim@elretirao.net>
In the past we were using some <div> tags surrounding table action
links in order to guarantee these links wouldn't be wider that their
cell's space and wouldn't expand over two lines.
However, while these links didn't expand over two lines, at certain
resolutions the width of their text exceeded the width of the links,
causing part of the text to be outside their borders.
This behavior was also inconsistent: some tables had these <div> tags,
and some tables didn't.
Since we've now introduced the table actions component, the code is more
consistent and we're getting rid of these <div> tags. So now we're again
facing the issue where links could expand over two lines.
Using a flex layout solves this issue and considerably improves the
layout at lower resolutions.
On high-resolution screens where neither the menu nor the main content
were filling the screen, there was a blank space at the bottom which
looked weird.
The <main> tag was including the navigation, and now we use the same
flex layout, making it more accessible for mobile phone users.
I'm not sure the <main> tag should actually include the account info and
the flash message. I'm keeping it like this in order to keep the layout
the way it was.
We were using `overflow: scroll` as a workaround with a problem we had
with the equalizer. But now we never need an extra vertical scroll bar,
and we only need an extra horizontal scroll bar on small screens.
Since the dashboard was using the class `admin-content` as well, we need
to apply to the dashboard the same changes we've done in the admin
section. I've extracted them into a mixin.
In some situations where JavaScript makes content disappear, the height
of the element calculated by foundation's equalizer isn't recalculated,
leaving blank space at the bottom of the page. I've seen cases where a
blank vertical space of 2000 pixels is on the page.
Using flexbox solves the problem, since CSS takes care of everything.
Our manual implementation had a few issues. In particular, it didn't
track changes related to associations, which became more of an issue
when we made investments translatable.
Using audited gives us more functionality while at the same time
simplifies our code. However, it adds one more external dependency to
our project.
The reason for choosing audited over paper trail is audited seems to
make it easier to handle associations.
Unfortunately this feature wasn't properly reviewed and tested, and it
had many bugs, some of them critical and hard to fix, like validations
being skipped in concurrent requests.
So we're removing it before releasing version 1.1. We might add it back
in the future if we manage to solve the critical issues.
This commit reverts commit 836f9ba7.
