Closed (fixed)
Project:
Drupal core
Version:
6.x-dev
Component:
other
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Bug report
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
4 Oct 2007 at 20:32 UTC
Updated:
25 Oct 2007 at 09:52 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent file
Comments
Comment #1
Stefan Nagtegaal commentedA simple no-brainer, and so this is RTBC.
Comment #2
gábor hojtsyThanks, committed.
Comment #3
sunAttached patch fixes some more occurences of the clearing element and empty help texts in node/add and node/edit.
Additionally, we have a critical problem in FAPI. All form submit buttons have the same element id:
I'd suggest to replace those ids with the form id suffixed by -submit, e.g.
However, I have no idea if there could be any implications with JavaScript. If you agree, I'll post another patch fixing this particular issue once for all forms.
Comment #4
sunMan, where's my head? This *will* actually break any JavaScript relying on element ids. Thus, attached patch introduces almost unique element ids for submit buttons -
system_settings_form seems to generate this awful code:
The second one either needs to be of #type button (instead of submit) or we need another unique but accessible identifier.
Comment #5
JirkaRybka commentedThe problem with auto-generated form id's (as well as JavaScript compatibility) was discussed at http://drupal.org/node/111719 - including a patch to review.
Comment #6
sunsystem_settings_form is not the only one, the same is true for user/#/edit:
However, patch in #3 is unrelated and should be RTBC.
Comment #7
sunok, #3 is ready to go then
Comment #8
JirkaRybka commentedI agree.
Comment #9
sunfound some more issues...
Comment #10
dvessel commentedWhy are we still using the .clear class? That was part of drupal.css in 4.7. All core themes should be using .clear-block to clear containers.
for patch #3, the .clear class inside phptemplate_preprocess_page() is obviously wrong since .clear isn't inside defaults.css or system.css.
Comment #11
sunNow this was some bug squashing... I've enabled all modules and with attached patch applied, (almost) all pages are XHTML valid now.
Comment #12
sun@dvessel: That's out of my scope - making pages XHTML valid is one thing, altering themes is another and I do not have any coding experience with Drupal core themes. As a themer I know that even such small changes can break the layout in certain browsers. So, that would have to be done by someone else. Probably best in another issue.
Comment #16
dvessel commentedThe original patch that went in is causing Garland to make node links 1px in height. Not good!
Comment #17
dvessel commentedThis patch is to fix what originally went in. It also moves around some of the markup so it's more exposed. i.e. primary/secondary local tasks.
The span clearing tag within the secondary task was not needed at all. There's a rule already set for "ul.secondary" to clear itself.
The clear-block declaration inside the rtl style is not needed so it's been removed. The other instances of the "clear" class has been removed and replaced with "clear-block".
Comment #18
dvessel commentedsun, this is exactly what your doing. Altering a core theme to make it valid. I'm fully behind you with this and lets do it right. :)
Comment #19
sunMerged dvessel's latest patch with my other fixes in #11, additionally fixed clearing element in maintenance.tpl.php
Comment #20
dvessel commentedThe patch looks great.
Just this one part:
Do we really want to omit the table? A patch recently went in to prevent validation errors even when there's no content. Have the table present all the time presents a cue to the user that they need to fill it in for it to do anything. The rest of core does this.
Comment #21
sunHm. Without this conditional,
<table></table>is output, which is XHTML invalid.Comment #22
dvessel commentedOkay, I actually looked at that page where the tables are affected and indeed it needs to go. Sorry bout that.
All tested and it's looking very good.
Comment #23
sun#19 still applies cleanly.
Comment #24
gábor hojtsyWhy did you move the list logic to the theme instead of the preprocess functions? It does not look logical.
Comment #25
dvessel commentedBecause it already does an if condition inside .tpl due to the tabs wrapper and it exposes the markup where it should be, the template file. Thought it would benefit themers in a small way if anything.
I can switch it back so the logic goes back into the preprocess function but that condition inside the template has to stay in effect checking twice. Not a big deal, I can change it back.
Comment #26
gábor hojtsyOK, understood now. Let me think about this a bit more though.
Comment #27
gábor hojtsyLooked through the patch again and committed, thanks.
Comment #28
(not verified) commented