Problem/Motivation

Right now width and height are intentionally text fields. Previously I've shunned only pixel integer width/height attributes (#2602124: Make video player responsive by default, hide not applicable width/height options) because they screwed up my ability to do responsive. Now that this is supported natively, is this a problem still?

Would someone conceivably care about using values like "50%" or "50em"? Making these pixels could clarify the UI a fair bit.

Proposed resolution

Make them pixels only.

Remaining tasks

Decide and patch.

User interface changes

Extra field suffix and description in the formatter settings.

API changes

Inability to do non-pixel units.

Data model changes

Change from a string to an integer in formatter settings.

Comments

Sam152 created an issue. See original summary.

sam152’s picture

Title: Should width/height only support dimensions? » Should width/height values only support dimensions in pixels?
sam152’s picture

Status: Active » Needs review
StatusFileSize
new5.59 KB

Status: Needs review » Needs work

The last submitted patch, 3: 2719399-pixel-width-height-3.patch, failed testing.

The last submitted patch, 3: 2719399-pixel-width-height-3.patch, failed testing.

The last submitted patch, 3: 2719399-pixel-width-height-3.patch, failed testing.

sam152’s picture

Status: Needs work » Needs review
StatusFileSize
new6.37 KB

The last submitted patch, 3: 2719399-pixel-width-height-3.patch, failed testing.

sam152’s picture

I think because the values can still be set programatically in exceptional circumstances, this is fine for the 90% case.

  • Sam152 committed 7077fd3 on 8.x-1.x
    Issue #2719399 by Sam152: Should width/height values only support...
sam152’s picture

Status: Needs review » Fixed

Status: Fixed » Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.