Last modified: 2014-06-26 22:10:54 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.
Bug 56403 - Use DOM append instead of z-index to position lightbox
Use DOM append instead of z-index to position lightbox
Status: NEW
Product: MediaWiki extensions
Classification: Unclassified
MultimediaViewer (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Low normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks: code_quality
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2013-10-31 00:22 UTC by Mark Holmquist
Modified: 2014-06-26 22:10 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Mark Holmquist 2013-10-31 00:22:21 UTC
Krinkle says z-index isn't as reliable and that position: absolute should be enough if we're the last thing in the <body> element.
Comment 1 Tisza Gergő 2013-10-31 22:49:23 UTC
I don't think so - anything with a z-index would still be above the lightbox.

Also, AFAIK z-index is reliable enough as long as you are using it on direct children of the <body> - the IE6 bug is related to z-indexed elements having non-static parents.

The z-index on .mlb-fullscreen-div is pointless, however - its parent also has a z-index so that one will determine how it is placed.
Comment 2 Mark Holmquist 2013-11-20 00:02:25 UTC
I guess the idea here is that we should *all* be using the append-to-DOM method as opposed to the z-index method, because the z-index method is DUMB.
Comment 3 Gilles Dubuc 2014-02-20 11:05:04 UTC
What else is using z-index right now, that would prevent us from moving to append? Isn't it risky to bet on the fact that all other extensions will play nice and not use z-index?
Comment 4 Mark Holmquist 2014-02-20 19:26:18 UTC
The backdrop, wrapper, and maybe the file usage dialog(s) are all using various values for z-index. Apparently the buttons are, too.

It shouldn'
Comment 5 Mark Holmquist 2014-02-20 19:26:55 UTC
...t be too hard to fix this, though, it's just a matter of making sure everything works well.

Honestly we could probably display:none the rest of the DOM while the lightbox is open.
Comment 6 Mark Holmquist 2014-02-20 19:27:41 UTC
...oh, we do already. We don't need z-index for that, then.
Comment 7 Tisza Gergő 2014-02-20 19:43:12 UTC
We are appending to the end of the body (maybe that was different when this bug was opened), but I see no good reason not to have a z-index as well. Any administrator on any wiki can put a z-index rule into MediaWiki:Common.css and cause us problems. Is there ever a valid reason to position something above the lightbox? (Notifications, maybe?)
Comment 8 Tisza Gergő 2014-02-20 19:45:34 UTC
...although display:none works as well.
Comment 9 Gilles Dubuc 2014-02-21 13:20:39 UTC
Yep, display: none is being applied already (could be taken a little bit further, though, by hiding all children except the mmv elements, currently it uses a whitelist). I think we can safely get rid of z-index. Any objections?

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links