Page MenuHomePhabricator

Adjust padding/positioning of orange talk notification in user links menu
Closed, ResolvedPublic

Description

The orange talk notification (OBOD) does not have its intended padding and is not vertically centered as a result of several overriding CSS rules which ultimately makes the padding-top: 0 but the padding-bottom non-zero.

This can be seen on the beta cluster if your user has a talk notification https://en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org.

obod.png (1×1 px, 247 KB)

Acceptance Criteria

  • The text in the notification is vertically centered

Developer Notes

See https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/mediawiki/skins/Vector/+/708586 for. a fix

Event Timeline

Change 708586 had a related patch set uploaded (by Nray; author: Nray):

[mediawiki/skins/Vector@master] Fix padding/positioning of the user menu orange talk message notification

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/708586

Jdlrobson subscribed.

Please move to sign off when this passes design review. If it it doesn't move to needs more work. Please test on the beta cluster.

Change 708586 merged by jenkins-bot:

[mediawiki/skins/Vector@master] Fix padding/positioning of the user menu orange talk message notification

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/708586

looks good


@nray it seems like fixing the vertical position of this element could be as simple as changing top: 85% when it's positioned absolutely. Do you think that's a trivial/non-risky change that we could make here, or would it be better to do in a separate task?

currentadjusted
image.png (204×561 px, 45 KB)
image.png (204×561 px, 45 KB)

@alexhollender It's trivial, and I'm happy to change it to whatever value you prefer as part of this ticket, but if we go with the 85% are you okay with the hover state of the buttons overlapping with the OBOD?

Screen Shot 2021-08-03 at 12.01.54 PM.png (236×614 px, 36 KB)

@nray good point...also my bad, because we're going to eventually update the tabs I'll make a note to revisit this after that.

85% sounds like a magic number to me. Could we eventually do this in ems as relative size, which is easier to switched over to rems when T261334 is clarified.