When you expand a category, the symbol changes from '+' to '–'. This is visually unappealing because the characters have different widths. The minus sign, however, has the same width as the plus sign. Line 26 of CategoryTree.js should be changed to:
lnk.innerHTML= '−';
to accomodate this.
Version: unspecified
Severity: trivial
I'd rather suggest the normal "-" sign (U+002D) since the − (U+2212) doesn't have to be rendered properly in user agents using poor fonts while "-" is ASCII and will be rendered properly everytime.
My very unscientific testing (one data point, Firefox 2.0 on Mac :) showed that −, −, and - all have a much shorter width from + in the default display, while – is slightly different but very close -- I have to zoom in a lot to see the difference.
So if it's just going to get worse from using −, I don't see a big benefit here.
ayg wrote:
(In reply to comment #3)
My very unscientific testing (one data point, Firefox 2.0 on Mac :) showed that
−, −, and - all have a much shorter width from + in the default
display, while – is slightly different but very close -- I have to zoom
in a lot to see the difference.
Could you be using a font that doesn't contain −? AFAIK it's generally assumed that + and − are to be the same width, and in my experience that's always been true (but Unicode doesn't seem to specify it). Does any single font actually contain radically different-width plus and minus, and if so, what were its creators smoking?
Not that this should really be a big factor in changing the status quo, if current browsers aren't rendering it properly, since pretty much everyone renders – as very close to the width of +. I'll change to LATER, it would be nice if this could be fixed eventually (when things aren't rendered so stupidly, one would hope).
[Removing RESOLVED LATER as discussed in http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2012-November/064240.html . Reopening and setting priority to "Lowest". For future reference, please use either RESOLVED WONTFIX (for issues that will not be fixed), or simply set lowest priority. Thanks a lot!]
(In reply to comment #7)
[Removing RESOLVED LATER as discussed in
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2012-November/064240.html .
Reopening and setting priority to "Lowest". For future reference, please use
either RESOLVED WONTFIX (for issues that will not be fixed), or simply set
lowest priority. Thanks a lot!]
No need to fix this one.