Note for css specialists

The searchtools css/scss are extremely confusing.
We have an instance in atum/scss/blocks/_searchtools.scss
and in build/media_source/system/css/searchtools.css

Their loading order as well as redundancies are a pain to deal with.
Do we really need to keep both? I guess that in any case a custom admin template would create its own scss if judged necessary.
Using only the atum scss one would help a lot.

Using only the atum scss one would help a lot.

The right thing is to use the other one from media. Also as this needs some touches to integrate to the Atum styles then an override needs to be created, eg the file atum/scss/blocks/_searchtools.scss needs to be renamed to atum/scss/system/searchtools.scss (of course it still needs to @import the original one there). Check #26077 The way this was done is leading to a monolith css file which is nowhere near to the current best practices (modularised assets)

@dgrammatiko
the one from media (css) is using for example
@media (max-width: 480px) {
while the atum scss one is using
@include media-breakpoint-down(sm) from bootstrap which equivalent to 576px....(defined in bootstrap map).

The resulting css may be
@media (max-width: 575.98px) { which may be defined in //media/vendor/bootstrap/scss/mixins/_breakpoints.scss taking off -.02

This is totally over my head. This should be the task of someone who knows better the stuff.
I can only deal with what we have now and try to do the rtl as nobody takes care of that.

As for touch ups, we should get first something stable including rtl whatever files they are.