Page MenuHomePhabricator

Update padding construction in Monobook #content and #firstHeading to be more like Vector
Closed, ResolvedPublic

Description

Author: a.d.bergi

Description:
Today the content has a padding-top of 0, while the firstheading gets a padding-top: .5em; (inherited from h1). Vector already has changed this to
div#content { padding-top: 1em; }
#firstHeading { padding-top: 0; }
which I suggest also for monobook. This would make any elements before the firstheading look alike in the various skins. It would notably affekt the central- or sitenotice, which often needs extra, skin-dependent css, mostly when there are absolutely positioned objects (coordinates etc.) at the top of the page.

This may refer to Bug 2013.

Also look at [[de:Wikipedia:Administratoren/Anfragen#centralNotice in MediaWiki:Monobook.css]].


Version: 1.17.x
Severity: enhancement

Details

Reference
bz26849

Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to Normal.Nov 21 2014, 11:18 PM
bzimport set Reference to bz26849.
bzimport created this task.Jan 21 2011, 6:34 PM

a.d.bergi wrote:

I think this should be fixed separatly from Bug 2013, theres no dependence.
I just wanted to link it because it deals with Heading-font-size, too; but after a bit of mediation I'm now afraid I just misunderstood its request.

a.d.bergi wrote:

proposed patch

attachment bug26849.patch ignored as obsolete

*Bulk BZ Change: +Patch to open bugs with patches attached that are missing the keyword*

sumanah wrote:

+need-review to signal to developers that this patch needs reviewing

TheDJ added a comment.Feb 26 2012, 3:42 PM

I see no problem with this patch, other than that it would break all the MediaWiki:Monobook.css pages with definitions for topicons and the likes. Not major, but would need good communication towards the community.

sumanah wrote:

Bergi, can you respond to Derk-Jan's comment? Do you think we should avoid breaking those pages, or break those pages and communicate systematically with the community ahead of time?

a.d.bergi wrote:

It wouldn't really break them, just the topicons would be 1em below their current position. Surely, it needs to be communicated, but I think we should do it because the cleaner implementation makes custom css easier.

rahul14m93 wrote:

Gerrit Change #56760

Change-Id: Iab04baea4131208373962e4ddf7c8ac83c7f2ca9