talk@lists.collectionspace.org
WE HAVE SUNSET THIS LISTSERV - Join us at collectionspace@lyrasislists.org
View all threadsQuestions about Hierarchy display (in location authorities): Sorting narrower contexts / Equivalent contexts truncated
Two questions about the hierarchy display (in location authorities, if that matters). Both are in this screen capture:
First, can the entries under the Narrower Context be sorted alphabetically / numerically? I can't quite figure out the order used to display them here.
Second, the display of Equivalent Context records is truncated. I can't figure out what in the CSS is doing this, but the width is being forced to 134px. If I force the width to be relative to the block, then it displays fine.
.cs-urnCSIDConverter.cs-externalURL-parent input {
width: 90%;
}
Unfortunately, I don't know enough about how the CSS was built to know if this is a good solution or if I'm masking a more fundamental problem.
Thoughts?
Peter
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
Hi Peter,
I think you'd have to add some JS code to sort those on the client -- in
Hierarchy.js, I assume. Even if you passed a flag to get results sorted by
name from the server, the app/services layers are not good at sorting
refnames. They would get sorted by the entire URN string, instead of just
the display name.
I also don't know much about how the CSS was built, but your fix for the
truncated fields seems as good as any.
Ray
On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Peter Murray pmurray@chillco.com wrote:
Two questions about the hierarchy display (in location authorities, if
that matters). Both are in this screen capture:
First, can the entries under the Narrower Context be sorted alphabetically
/ numerically? I can't quite figure out the order used to display them
here.
Second, the display of Equivalent Context records is truncated. I can't
figure out what in the CSS is doing this, but the width is being forced to
134px. If I force the width to be relative to the block, then it displays
fine.
.cs-urnCSIDConverter.cs-externalURL-parent input {
width: 90%;
}
Unfortunately, I don't know enough about how the CSS was built to know if
this is a good solution or if I'm masking a more fundamental problem.
Thoughts?
Peter
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company
Talk mailing list
Talk@lists.collectionspace.org
http://lists.collectionspace.org/mailman/listinfo/talk_lists.collectionspace.org
Thanks, Ray. I see what you mean about having to do it in the JavaScript layer -- sorting on the RefNames at the server side would not be helpful. My JavaScript-foo is not as strong as other languages, but this seems like a straight forward change. I'm also going to give the CSS change a try and see if anything else breaks. I can't tell if the selector is specific enough to just that part of the page, but I guess we'll find out.
Peter
On Nov 3, 2015, at 9:00 PM, Ray Lee rhlee@berkeley.edu wrote:
Hi Peter,
I think you'd have to add some JS code to sort those on the client -- in Hierarchy.js, I assume. Even if you passed a flag to get results sorted by name from the server, the app/services layers are not good at sorting refnames. They would get sorted by the entire URN string, instead of just the display name.
I also don't know much about how the CSS was built, but your fix for the truncated fields seems as good as any.
Ray
On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Peter Murray <pmurray@chillco.com mailto:pmurray@chillco.com> wrote:
Two questions about the hierarchy display (in location authorities, if that matters). Both are in this screen capture:
<PastedGraphic-1.tiff>
First, can the entries under the Narrower Context be sorted alphabetically / numerically? I can't quite figure out the order used to display them here.
Second, the display of Equivalent Context records is truncated. I can't figure out what in the CSS is doing this, but the width is being forced to 134px. If I force the width to be relative to the block, then it displays fine.
.cs-urnCSIDConverter.cs-externalURL-parent input {
width: 90%;
}
Unfortunately, I don't know enough about how the CSS was built to know if this is a good solution or if I'm masking a more fundamental problem.
Thoughts?
Peter
--
Peter Murray
Dev/Ops Lead and Project Manager
Cherry Hill Company