I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 3280db0

The accessibility team have requested that this page has an H1 title - this PR removes that
also any image must have an alt description OR if it is purely decorative then it must have alt=""

I have tested this item ? unsuccessfully on d53bda4

Changed to adding the custom logo if exists, @brianteeman @farrelljsec please retest

Hm I copied a field from isis template, seems no code style is followed there, thats where the mistake came from. Should be fixed now.

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on ba2709d

Followed instructions. Result as expected.

:):):)

dont see any issue in isis or i would fix it

				<field 
					name="loginLogoFile" 
					type="media" 
					label="TPL_ISIS_LOGIN_LOGO_LABEL"
					description="TPL_ISIS_LOGIN_LOGO_DESC"
					class="" 
					default=""
				 />

@brianteeman

no idea what you have on your computer but it is not the same code we have in github

Perhaps keep site title when logo is not specified?
Sitetitle is now always kept because of a11y issues @brianteeman mentioned.

@coolcat-creations oops, I meant to say remove if specified.

I think @brianteeman means that image alt could be added as another param.

@SharkyKZ as far I understood he said to keep the h1 title for a11y.

BTW the xml you copied came from a very very old version of joomla - thats why you had the problem

@coolcat-creations can we add a toggle for the Page heading? Default on of course.

@tonypartridge if it’s an accessibility thing I rather would not add an option to remove it. Only thing is that I do not understand why the sitename increases the accessibility- I rather see here then a title that explains where I am. Something like „Joomla Backend Login Page“ - this can be written in small letters and below / sitename or Logo or both.

But to me there are cases where design wins over accessibility. In terms of a company which has no employee with accessibility needs, so a customising toggle to put a logo in and hide H1 tag would be much more beneficial.

For a11y I would have thought it would need an Administrator string attached so they know they are in the backend?

On Sep 9, 2018 at 6:33 pm, <Elisa Foltyn (mailto:notifications@github.com)> wrote:

@tonypartridge (https://github.com/tonypartridge) if it’s an accessibility thing I rather would not add an option to remove it. Only thing is that I do not understand why the sitename increases the accessibility- I rather see here then a title that explains where I am. Something like „Joomla Backend Login Page“ - this can be written in small letters and below / sitename or Logo or both.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub (#22084 (comment)), or mute the thread (https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABVglkDweYD_rT3tmVRKnpunj8BfuNzBks5uZVD9gaJpZM4Wf5Nw).

Yes I have the similar thought about that it makes more sense to tell people where they are instead of output of the sitename. Doesn’t make sense to me regarding a11y. I will have a thought about how to solve your request and remain a11y compliant :)

@tonypartridge I added the functionality to show the sitename or not and added the A11y h1 with the information where the User is at...

What I will have to do in another PR is to refactor the whole login page because it has a lot of useless additional classes and is not using the BS4 that is already providing those classes.

Testing Instructions and PR Description is updated.

I am not in favour of this change. If a site builder wants to customise the login page they should create an override

I have to disagree with your @brianteeman this is a nice and easy way to provide some basic branding to the admin area for the clients.

You shouldn't need complex template overrides to give a basic style to the backend login page which this does nicely.

I agree to @tonypartridge

1. Easy Layout adjustments should be able to be done with few clicks - I would even add a few more (Background Color and Image) - as well as changes for the backend colors. (like described in the backend concept - Please read the concept for that)
2. There is no possibility to override a core template. If so, then I missed possibly a huge feature. You can only copy and assign the copy and then some day you will be completely out-of-date with your copy.
3. Override of a core template would be great, for that we would need to define where the overrides will be stored. I can try to add this feature so that we have basic options in the template and advanced options per override.

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 57a1839

Tested working as desired.

@SharkyKZ can you retest? If this is merged I will work on the other mentioned points in seperate PRs

@coolcat-creations just to add something else to your list... we could do with enhancing the note field to be 100% width, the label jumps onto another line at present. Maybe an if only label and no description fill 100% like if we set hr="true"

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 57a1839

Installed patch. Added logo. Set Show site name to no. Logo shown, sitename not shown.
Set Show site name to yes. Logo and sitename shown.

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on 57a1839

Installed patch. Added logo. Set Show site name to no. Logo shown, sitename not shown.
Set Show site name to yes. Logo and sitename shown.

Ready to Commit after two successful tests.

@tony and @crommie thank you for testing and the suggestions.
I will create another PR with some general code improvements on the login view. This is independant of this PR and I will do it as soon as this is merged.

Override of a core template would be great, for that we would need to define where the overrides will be stored. I can try to add this feature so that we have basic options in the template and advanced options per override.

No. Just, no. The template is the primary source of truth for all things markup. If we start introducing systems where template markup can be overridden, it will make things even more complicated than they are.

You shouldn't need complex template overrides to give a basic style to the backend login page which this does nicely.

What defines "basic" options and what defines options that are best suited as a new template? By your logic, almost everything that is controlled with some form of CSS variable (default font size, font family, color schemes of every element, etc.) could be considered "basic" and next thing you know it the template style edit page for the backend template has about 300 options.

You can only copy and assign the copy and then some day you will be completely out-of-date with your copy.

If you are copying a template, you are in essence forking it. Why does it matter if the source template continues to evolve after you've copied the template? At the point you copied the template it is your's to customize however you please, which includes the maintenance work of synchronizing changes from the source template if you so desire.

@coolcat-creations code should be cleaned before merging.

Override of a core template would be great, for that we would need to define where the overrides will be stored. I can try to add this feature so that we have basic options in the template and advanced options per override.

No. Just, no. The template is the primary source of truth for all things markup. If we start introducing systems where template markup can be overridden, it will make things even more complicated than they are.

I am ok with your no. I just was trying to fulful something @brianteeman suggested as solution.

You shouldn't need complex template overrides to give a basic style to the backend login page which this does nicely.

What defines "basic" options and what defines options that are best suited as a new template? By your logic, almost everything that is controlled with some form of CSS variable (default font size, font family, color schemes of every element, etc.) could be considered "basic" and next thing you know it the template style edit page for the backend template has about 300 options.

Basic is defined by how you can adjust the backend to a customer or site integrator. This was defined and agreed by the marketing department to increase the possibilities to add the own branding into the template. Basic Options IMHO are: Logo and Colorscheme.

You can only copy and assign the copy and then some day you will be completely out-of-date with your copy.

If you are copying a template, you are in essence forking it. Why does it matter if the source template continues to evolve after you've copied the template? At the point you copied the template it is your's to customize however you please, which includes the maintenance work of synchronizing changes from the source template if you so desire.

Thats the reason why a core template should have some basic options. Why should I fork the template just because I want to change the displayed logo. Does not make any sense and is an overkill in managing that.

@coolcat-creations code should be cleaned before merging.

The code cleanup will be done in a seperate PR because the whole classes of the login page have to be rewritten. There is so much unneeded additional classes there...

The scope of the PR was to add the options as successfuly tested, and I will create a new PR so change the markup afterwards.

"Basic Options" is still an arbitrary measure, and that's kind of my point. It's not that the options are bad necessarily, but different viewpoints are going to suggest that different customizations should be offered through the template style edit page and not require custom CSS or whatnot. If there is an agreed upon list of changes that will be supported through the template style edit page, that's fine, I just don't want us entertaining options for too many elements personally.

@mbabker

Login Page: Vendor Logo, Show/hide sitename, background color, background image
Backend: Setup colors

For more changes:
Maybe a possibility to add custom.scss

For (even) more changes:
Admin has to create a fork...

Ok?

@mbabker thank you - done - I planned to have all settings on one tab in future thats why I used the spacer, but changed it now to own tab

The language strings are not correct.

@brianteeman should RTC set back on Pending?

Please set back to pending

Status back on Pending as requested.

Last commit broke codestyle in login.php.

Thanks guys!