Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.

Bug 380565

Summary:	consider fixed header/fluid footer
Product:	[ECD] Orion	Reporter:	Susan McCourt <susan>
Component:	Client	Assignee:	Project Inbox <orion.client-inbox>
Status:	RESOLVED WONTFIX	QA Contact:
Severity:	normal
Priority:	P3	CC:	antonm, eclipse, john.arthorne
Version:	0.5
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	PC
OS:	Windows 7
Whiteboard:
Bug Depends on:
Bug Blocks:	369427

Description Susan McCourt

2012-05-24 13:13:52 EDT

This is mentioned in bug 369427, but I'd like to track it separately.

We currently fix the Orion header at the top and the footer at the bottom.  There is really no reason that we should fix the footer.

This is historical because it is needed to be fixed in the editor, where the editor is managing a viewport and is not rendering the entire file content.  However, for all other pages where there is fluid/scrollable content, it makes no sense to pin the footer at the bottom.  No one else does this.

I'd like to change this, and as part of this exercise, I'd like to consider getting us off of dijit border container completely.

Note that we are experimenting with fixed headers via scrollspys in bug 380454 so what we want is some lightweight absolute positioning.

Part of this discussion should include our use of splitters...who else is doing this and can we try a layout that doesn't need it?

The end goal is that folks could play with layout via CSS and not be fighting a border container.

Comment 1 Susan McCourt

2012-05-24 13:14:57 EDT

I'd like to work toward this for 1.0.
Will work with Anton on the goals/design.

Comment 2 Susan McCourt

2012-08-15 12:40:12 EDT

(In reply to comment #0)
> We currently fix the Orion header at the top and the footer at the bottom. 
> There is really no reason that we should fix the footer.
> 
> This is historical because it is needed to be fixed in the editor, where the
> editor is managing a viewport and is not rendering the entire file content. 
> However, for all other pages where there is fluid/scrollable content, it
> makes no sense to pin the footer at the bottom.  No one else does this.
> 
> I'd like to change this, and as part of this exercise, I'd like to consider
> getting us off of dijit border container completely.

We are off of dijit BorderContainer via bug 383827.
So the remaining question is simply do we want to change some pages to have a non-fixed footer?  It's easy to do with CSS now.

I don't see this as very necessary given how skinny the footer is, though.  If we develop a fatter footer over time, we should consider.

Comment 3 John Arthorne

2012-09-21 10:45:51 EDT

Some recent discussion in bug 293481 made me think of this again. Our footer is skinny but I see zero value in keeping it on the screen all the time. I don't care strongly about this, but some developers certainly do and they might appreciate the design touch. A floating footer also makes it feel a lot more like a real web page rather than an IDE glued into a web page.

Comment 4 Susan McCourt

2012-09-24 12:16:09 EDT

(In reply to comment #3)
> A floating footer also makes it feel a
> lot more like a real web page rather than an IDE glued into a web page.

Agree.  This should be relatively simple to do, but it fell out of 1.0 due to time constraints, the main point being to make sure all the vertical scrollbar behavior is correct (no double scrollbars, etc.)

Comment 5 John Arthorne

2015-05-05 14:52:28 EDT

Closing as part of a mass clean up of inactive bugs. Please reopen if this problem still occurs or is relevant to you. For more details see:

https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/orion-dev/msg03444.html