New carousel cards #685
New carousel cards #685
Conversation
The upcoming component needs the gutter value in Javascript.
Using the vue-ssr-carousel dependency. These are interchangeable with the previous slider, except the composition is a bit different because the new one occupies the full page width. So it shouldn't be inside a (non fluid) b-container.
This will make it easy to migrate from the current "slidable" (which is default).
|
I've found this situation when testing this branch:
Joana hasn't seen this yet, but I suspect the desired behavior in this case is to left align the grid instead of center it. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The patch series is fantastic, it was super easy to review. Thank you for that.
I had to learn what <b-container fluid> means, and AFAIU one would pass fluid to make the container have 100% of the width.
The only thing that I found was the centralized grid I described above. Now that I'm testing it more, I wonder if it should scroll when scrolling horizontally with touchpads too.
|
@GeorgesStavracas thanks for testing! You are absolutely right about the bad centering. I realize that we don't need a carousel component at all if there is no pagination (less-or-equal than 4 cards in a big screen). So I appended a commit that uses a simple (responsive) grid in that case. |
If there is no need to paginate, just use a responsive grid. Also update current grid configuration to match: - 4 cards in large - 2 cards in medium - 1 card in small
manuq
force-pushed
the
new-carousel-cards
branch
from
5a418ef to
9e80711
Compare
| EkSlidableGridNew, | ||
| EkSlidableCardGridNew, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we choose a better name for these components? EkSlidableGrid vs EkSlidableGridNew has zero meaning for someone who was not around when they were created. I tried to think of some suggestions and the best I could come up with was EkInertialSlidableGrid, but I'm not sure how good that is.
The new one is meant to replace the current one. I don't see any reason to keep the old component once we are happy with the new implementation. My idea was to temporarely keep it as a separate component (suffixed "new") for comparing them side-by-side. |
I thought we would want to keep both components. If we are replacing the old one immediately, the |
Resolves #686