Instead of having a universal vertical placement for modals, it should be based on the viewport dimensions. rem and perhaps em fallbacks should be provided, in case vh units aren't supported.
[7/18/14, 1:52:39 PM] Erik Rath: ... At first glance, I like the way the native bootstrap modal behaves (no bounce!), though am slightly ambivalent about the way it sticks all the way at the top of the browser window (Positive: doesn’t waste space; Negative: just seems different from most other modals I’ve seen. Probably fine, just strange). Will continue looking into it. Let me know if I missed any uses for them.
[7/18/14, 2:01:24 PM] Chris Basham: @ Erik ...
As for the vertical placement of modals, that could certainly be something that we could experiment with, as it should be a CSS property, not hard coded in JavaScript. Perhaps the vertical positioning is variable to the viewport height. For example, if there's a lot of vertical room, then it can be lower; if not, then it should be higher.
[7/18/14, 2:02:16 PM] Erik Rath: That would be ideal. Even just a little bit of room to reinforce that this is Kuali talking to me, not Chrome, could be helpful
[7/18/14, 3:14:38 PM] Chris Basham: @ Erik I mocked up an approach we could take for dynamic modal positioning based on viewport dimensions.
http://codepen.io/basham/full/GhpeF/
[7/18/14, 3:20:45 PM] Erik Rath: That was fast :).
[7/18/14, 3:20:51 PM] Erik Rath: That looks really good!
Instead of having a universal vertical placement for modals, it should be based on the viewport dimensions.
remand perhapsemfallbacks should be provided, in casevhunits aren't supported.Mockup: http://codepen.io/basham/full/GhpeF/