[#28839] - [4.0] Template Atum - Cleanup and fix Logo Usage
- Fixed in Code Base
- 23 Jul 2020
- Medium
- Build: 4.0-dev
- # 28839
- Diff
- coolcat-creations:atum-logo-changes
- Pending Hound Hound is busy sniffing around... Details
User tests: Successful: 2 Quy, infograf768 Unsuccessful: 0
Pull Request for Issue #28826
Summary of Changes
- Removed unused logos
- Renamed logos to more generic names
- Moved logos to subfolder
- Renamed variables to more recognizeable names
- Changed scss
- Added sizes to svg instead scss
- Changed order of Login input fields
- Changed Language Strings
Testing Instructions
-
Install the patch
-
npm run build:css
-
check login logo, logo in headerbar, expand and collapse the sidebar
-
upload own logos:
Custom header collapsed Logo recommended max. size 25px x 25px
Custom header expanded Logo recommended max. size 275px x 45 px -
Question: The Logo Variables repeat all over the template files, would it be an idea to have a logos.php file and include it into the severall template files?
-
Login Logo appears black for now but only until the PR #28788 will be merged
| Status | New | ⇒ | Pending |
joomla-cms-bot
- | Category | ⇒ | Administration Language & Strings Templates (admin) |
| Labels |
Added:
?
?
|
||
| Title |
|
||||||
what is the reasoning behind changing the name from site logo to header logo?
@brianteeman IMO it's not the "site" but the backend or administration (Maybe lost in translation?)
Additionally it's the logo that is displayed in the header - there is another logo displayed at login - so the login logo could be also the site logo and then the confusion with new users starts.
I tried to find names where the user knows exactly where the logos might appear.
What do you think about it?
@coolcat-creations that doesnt convince me of the need to change its name
@brianteeman I don't understand why it does not convice you, what are the advantages of the label "Site Logo" if it's even not on the site but in the administration ?
We use everywhere in the backend the context site for the frontend and administrator for backend. I think naming it site logo is quite confusing and not consistent.
i am not in favour of a name that is tied to a location. Your argument for changing it from site is valid though. how about "brand"? then it means either joomla brnad logo or as often used the agency brand
@brianteeman brand is fine too.
Brand collapsed and Brand expanded
or
Brand large and Brand small ?
@brianteeman brand is fine too.
Brand collapsed and Brand expanded
or
Brand large and Brand small ?
Large and Small
@brianteeman - Done :-)
I answered the question before looking at the code ;)
If you can fix conflicts @coolcat-creations I'm happy to get this merged as seems very sensible!
Can anyone give me a hint how to resolve conflicts here? It's greyed out...
| Labels |
Added:
Conflicting Files
|
||
| Category | Administration Language & Strings Templates (admin) | ⇒ | Administration Language & Strings Templates (admin) NPM Change |
@coolcat-creations Yes, if it becomes too complicated for the GitHub UI you can only do it in a local git client. I did it for you as good as I knew, but there is one thing you should check: If the SVG files added by your PR somehow were based on those deleted by this PR (i.e. a rename with move would have been better), you might have to update your new SVGs by the changes having done on the old SVGs meanwhile in the 4.0-dev branch.
@coolcat-creations
I still don't understand. You marked the conversation as resolved but:
You are deleting logo-joomla-blue.svg
but it is still present in error_login.php
: $this->baseurl . '/templates/' . $this->template . '/images/logo-joomla-blue.svg';
Same for logo-blue.svg
I have marked both conversations to unresolved until we get an explanation.
| Labels |
Added:
NPM Resource Changed
Removed: Conflicting Files |
||
@coolcat-creations
I still don't understand. You marked the conversation as resolved but:
You are deletinglogo-joomla-blue.svg
but it is still present in error_login.php
: $this->baseurl . '/templates/' . $this->template . '/images/logo-joomla-blue.svg';
Same forlogo-blue.svgI have marked both conversations to unresolved until we get an explanation.
Thank you, sorry - I don't remember - I think I had overseen it. I corrected it now. Anyway it would make sense in another PR to centralize the logo usage instead of repeating in each document?
@coolcat-creations Yes, if it becomes too complicated for the GitHub UI you can only do it in a local git client. I did it for you as good as I knew, but there is one thing you should check: If the SVG files added by your PR somehow were based on those deleted by this PR (i.e. a rename with move would have been better), you might have to update your new SVGs by the changes having done on the old SVGs meanwhile in the 4.0-dev branch.
Thank you very much... It was not complicated but It was greyed out and I had no permission (I don't know why) :)
Looks like working (forgot to use npm in a first try)...
thank you
I have tested this item
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/28839.
I have tested this item
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/28839.
| Status | Pending | ⇒ | Ready to Commit |
RTC
This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/28839.
| Status | Ready to Commit | ⇒ | Fixed in Code Base |
| Closed_Date | 0000-00-00 00:00:00 | ⇒ | 2020-07-23 06:33:59 |
| Closed_By | ⇒ | infograf768 | |
| Labels |
Added:
?
|
||
Tks.
thank you!
what is the reasoning behind changing the name from site logo to header logo?