[Kmymoney-devel] Re: Feature Request: "id" attributes for divs in Home view

[Lance Fetters]

On 04/26/2011 11:31 PM, Cristian Oneț wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Lance Fetters<gaizin at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> I'm currently modifying a user-local copy of the kmymoney.css file in
>> order to customize the "Home" view; my hope is to create a two-column
>> layout so that I can view a large amount of information without having
>> to scroll.
>>
>> However, the different div elements genereated for the different
>> sections in the Home view, such as "Payments" and "Forecast", do not
>> appear to have "id" tags. In other words, it is currently not possible
>> to write CSS that specifically targets only one section (and thus is not
>> possible to individually position sections).
>>
>> While I could modify and recompile a version for myself, I was hoping
>> that the team might consider adding id tags for the sections (most
>> likely by adding a new div that wraps the shadow div) in an upcoming
>> release. It appears that this could be done in the following file:
>>
>>
>> http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/extragear/office/kmymoney/kmymoney/views/khomeview.cpp?view=markup
>>
>> ... by modifying, for example, the showAccounts() method.
>>
>> I apologize for not providing a patch, but I currently do not have a
>> compilation environment setup (and do not have the space to create one).
>
> Hi,
>
> I see no harm in adding ids to the divs. Do we really need one to wrap
> the divs with class shadow or would it be enough to add one id to each
> div that is currently of class shadow?
> If we do this then would it be possible for you to share the special
> css file with other user who might find it useful?
>
> Regards,
> Cristian

Structurally and semantically-speaking, adding the id to the shadow div 
feels a bit off; however, it would be enough to achieve what I am 
attempting.

Yes, I am willing to share my finished CSS, though admittedly my CSS 
experience is rather limited, and whatever layout I come up with would 
only work for a given set of enabled sections. Still, it may serve as a 
reference for others to base their own design upon.


Thank you for considering this change,

-- 
Lance Fetters
Ogaki, Gifu, Japan