Active workspace has a broken styling in dark mode

thanks for an initial MR @hoxton... i've tried to check it out, but problem is, you are using the branch name "main" which is already taken. so the MR does not work... but i've manually applied the change using the transparent keyword. that way the state isn't visible at all. that is not in line with WCAG2.2 SC1.4.11

i've then manually applied the suggestion in #2.2 and #2.3 as well ... with that approach in both cases the active state is at least somehow visible. main problem is that it doesnt meet the required minimum of 3:1 for state, both have a contrast of around 1.28:1 and 1.29:2... that reminded me to another issue #3207233: Improve the visual indication of the active workspace in the Workspaces listing UI that is basically about the visual indication of the active workspace. the linked issue was about the light mode only with claro and the dark mode from gin was not on the radar yet (which complicates things further)

the white background in dark mode is definitely a serious problem. so i am tempted to vote for a preliminary fix with an approach like suggested in #2.2 or #2.3 so the active workspace becomes at least legible again and to some extend highlighted in dark mode and do the proper fix in #3207233: Improve the visual indication of the active workspace in the Workspaces listing UI?

-1 for RTBC from my end. the name of the feature branch has a naming collision (main) with the main branch, and yes in dark mode the active workspace becomes legible again but by using transparent as the color of choice for the active workspace the coloring of that active workspace is getting dropped - not only for the dark mode but for the light mode as well. wcag compliant labeling of the active workspace can be part of #3207233: Improve the visual indication of the active workspace in the Workspaces listing UI but i wouldnt drop the labeling of the active workspace entirely for light and dark mode as the fix. there are better ways for a preliminary fix until there is a consensus for a proper overall fix in #3207233: Improve the visual indication of the active workspace in the Workspaces listing UI imho.

i've manually tested #2.3 locally and that worked as a preliminary fix. as @shank115 proposed it is enough to set

tr.active-workspace {
  background-color: var(--admin-color-bg-item);
}

i've tried to simply create a new MR to solve the naming conflict with the default main branch as well. therefore i've simply clicked the "create new branch" link on top of the issue... cuz i was able to fetch the issue fork but i was unable to checkout the one named main. the idea was to simply create a new MR, being able to check it out and then make the necessary changes locally and then push those changes up. problem is ive created a new MR based on main but i am unable to checkout it out with the given command:

<del>git checkout -b '3627936-active-workspace-has-broken-styling' --track drupal-3627936/'3627936-active-workspace-has-broken-styling'</del>

i get

<del>fatal: 'drupal-3627936/3627936-active-workspace-has-broken-styling' is not a commit and a branch '3627936-active-workspace-has-broken-styling' cannot be created from it</del>

i guess i've misunderstood some of the innerworkings of git and feature branches :(

i had to readd and refetch the feature branch then the checkout worked. the changes should be up soonish.

i've pushed a commit to MR17471 replacing the transparent color / previous fixed color with the variable var(--admin-color-bg-item) proposed by @shank115 in #2. the MR also fixes the name collision in MR17349 with the main branch.

and I agree with the suggestion by @catch, the probably cleanest would be removing the styling from the workspaces module and move that already within this issue over to default admin. MR17471 might need another update for that. but for now the coloring by accent colors is now testable in MR17471.

thanks @mherchel, i've updated the MR with your suggestion. linting passes, but there are some warnings in the context to phpunit but probably unrelated with this MR since these are CSS only changes? so ive set it back to needs review.