You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The recent MDN redesign has reduced the width available for the Border-image Generator. As an example there is now only room for 2 boxes dedicated to each individual property per grid line instead of the old design that had room to show 3. This makes the page a bit longer and therefore slightly harder to use. Have had some thoughts about changes to help with this:
the image selection options at the top (including the UI to upload your own image) seem like they should be in a box similar to all the others titled "border-image-source". Would take up less room and have a more consistent UI. This might need to be 2 grid spots.
I'm not entirely sure I understand the point of the area labeled "control box". It's marking a fixed height for the area below it but I don't think it's really necessary. Will explain more in up coming points
the visual border-image-slice UI is very nice but it seems like it should just go in the "border-image-slice" titled box with the other border-image-slice controls. This might also then need to be 2 grid spots.
All that would leave in the "control box" area is the current drag-able preview element (which by the way is always drag-able even if the drag-able toggle is off) with the live border-image. Maybe we just add the border-image code to each of the individual "border-image-" property boxes so that a preview of the resulting border-image is always on screen? A side benefit of this is seeing the border-image on 2 different sized elements (one gird space wide and 2 grid spaces wide).
Dev tools is calling out the heading text color contrast on the individual "border-image-x" properties for not meeting the AA standard. So that should get fixed as well.
Any other thoughts on the UI?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
caugner
added
needs triage
Triage needed by staff and/or partners. Automatically applied when an issue is opened.
enhancement
Improves an existing feature.
effort: large
Task is large effort.
and removed
needs triage
Triage needed by staff and/or partners. Automatically applied when an issue is opened.
labels
Oct 10, 2023
The recent MDN redesign has reduced the width available for the Border-image Generator. As an example there is now only room for 2 boxes dedicated to each individual property per grid line instead of the old design that had room to show 3. This makes the page a bit longer and therefore slightly harder to use. Have had some thoughts about changes to help with this:
the image selection options at the top (including the UI to upload your own image) seem like they should be in a box similar to all the others titled "border-image-source". Would take up less room and have a more consistent UI. This might need to be 2 grid spots.
I'm not entirely sure I understand the point of the area labeled "control box". It's marking a fixed height for the area below it but I don't think it's really necessary. Will explain more in up coming points
the visual
border-image-slice
UI is very nice but it seems like it should just go in the "border-image-slice" titled box with the otherborder-image-slice
controls. This might also then need to be 2 grid spots.All that would leave in the "control box" area is the current drag-able preview element (which by the way is always drag-able even if the drag-able toggle is off) with the live border-image. Maybe we just add the
border-image
code to each of the individual "border-image-" property boxes so that a preview of the resultingborder-image
is always on screen? A side benefit of this is seeing the border-image on 2 different sized elements (one gird space wide and 2 grid spaces wide).Dev tools is calling out the heading text color contrast on the individual "border-image-x" properties for not meeting the AA standard. So that should get fixed as well.
Any other thoughts on the UI?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: