marcomachadosantos / gwt-chronoscope

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/gwt-chronoscope
GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1
0 stars 0 forks source link

Problem with chrome.css injection. #129

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Hi, I'm using the last version (from repo) of Chronoscope. I realized that 
you have included this line to Chronoscope.gwt.xml

         <stylesheet src="theme/chrome/chrome.css" />

The problem is that in this way you are changing the base definition of GWT 
styles. For example you are changing this style:

                .gwt-MenuBarPopup, .gwt-MenuBarPopup table, td {...}

Which will affect no only Chronoscope, but the rest of the application. Is 
there any way you can change this behavior.

Best regards.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by elgaby@gmail.com on 12 Apr 2010 at 12:40

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
I'm having the same problem. It seems kind of lame since you're already 
supposed to
specify using Chronoscope.setTheme(Theme.NONE)

I'm going to try bypass inheriting from Chronoscope.gwt.xml while leaving out 
the
<stylesheet/> part. I'll let you know how it goes. I can't think of another way 
to
get around this except for building everything from source.

Original comment by wals...@gmail.com on 27 Apr 2010 at 5:14

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Yeah, preliminarily it looks like this works. Instead of 

<inherits name="org.timepedia.chronoscope.Chronoscope"></inherits>

just copy everything inside Chronoscope.gwt.xml except for the <stylesheet/> 
part and
paste that into your module.

Original comment by wals...@gmail.com on 27 Apr 2010 at 5:22

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
The reason there's a modified gwt theme is because the gwt theme had overly 
broad css selectors that would modify styles in the host page.   Of course, the 
plan is to move to 2.0 style layout.

Original comment by socon...@gmail.com on 27 Jul 2010 at 4:54

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
This issue was closed by revision r1263.

Original comment by manuel.carrasco.m on 24 Oct 2010 at 8:22