FLUID-1542: Springboards: Draggable elements move around static elmenents during addition and removal of elements in a column

Metadata

Source
FLUID-1542
Type
Bug
Priority
Major
Status
Closed
Resolution
Fixed
Assignee
Jacob Farber
Reporter
Justin Obara
Created
2008-09-10T14:51:44.000-0400
Updated
2011-01-14T09:53:23.697-0500
Versions
  1. 0.5beta1
Fixed Versions
  1. 0.5
Component
  1. Demos
  2. Layout Reorderer
  3. Reorderer

Description

Draggable elements move around static elmenents during addition and removal of elements in a column

Steps to reproduce:

1) Open the Layout Customizer Springboard example from the daily build site
http://build.fluidproject.org/fluid/fluid-components/html/LayoutCustomizer.html

2) Look at the second example

3) Move some draggable elements from Column A to the bottom of Column B.

4) Move a draggable element from Column C to the top of Column B. Notice that it appears to be added to the bottom of Column B.

5) Move a draggable element from Column C to Column B between the first static element and the draggable element.

6) Move any of the top draggable elements from Column B to any other column. Notice that it appears to take it from the bottom.

It's hard to tell from this example which elements are moving where but I would guess that the lower draggable elements are moving up to take the place of the higher draggable element that was moved.

Environments

FF2, FF3, Opera 9.5, Safari 3 (Mac OS 10.5)
FF2, FF3, IE6, IE7, Opera 9.5 (Win XP)
FF3, IE7 (Win Vista)
FF3, IE6 (Win 2000)

Comments

  • Colin Clark commented 2008-09-15T16:43:59.000-0400

    This one isn't a blocker, since I'm not sure we have any concrete examples that require this behaviour. If we can't fix it, let's remove it from the Springboards.

  • Justin Obara commented 2008-09-18T17:09:37.000-0400

    Also occurs in example 1 of the Reorderer Springboard
    http://build.fluidproject.org/fluid/fluid-components/html/Reorderer.html

  • Justin Obara commented 2008-09-22T12:59:59.000-0400

    Bug Parade: 0.5 release

  • Jacob Farber commented 2008-09-22T15:07:19.000-0400

    Removed example due to it being reliant on legacy approach to locked portlets. "Dead" portlets should really be locked portlets.