Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of Ticket #4321, comment 5
- Timestamp:
- Dec 15, 2016, 3:10:54 PM (7 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
Ticket #4321, comment 5
v1 v2 2 2 > For instance, setting a `max_size` on an object also imposes a maximum size of any relationally-sized children of that object. This works automatically due to how sizing in the gui system works. 3 3 > If a `min_size` is set on an object, should that also prevent the parent (and the parent of the parent, and so on) from getting any smaller than that? What should happen if there are two (or more) siblings with a `min_size`? Should the parent be prevented from shrinking below the largest of the `min_size` of its children? Or perhaps a sum of relevant derived values from the `min_size`s of all its children? And how would this be fetched? This would require a rethink of how the gui system handles sizes. 4 No, `size_min` and `size_max` should work the same and shouldn't affect a parent or/and a child, it works automatically. Or your patch is wrong, because `size_max` doesn't affect on childs size. 4 No, `size_min` and `size_max` should work the same and shouldn't affect a parent or/and a child, it works automatically. Or your patch is wrong, because `size_max` doesn't affect on childs size. We have the clear relationship system, so just use it. 5 5 6 6 > Or more accurately, the style is applied to all UI elements *except* tooltips (and scrollbars) (the comments in the mentioned `style.xml` files should probably be updated to reflect this). The styling for tooltips are set within `setup.xml` files, and for some reason although there does exist a setup/style with the name `default` (in `gui/common/modern/style.xml`), this is not actually used as a default. Thus, everytime a tooltip is defined/setup, it would require a `size_max` attribute to be set.
