Open allanaaa opened 2 years ago
A fix is ready for testing.
This is fine. I don't love the max-width:50% on the images, I feel like squishing them even shorter than 48px is a bit of a waste of space. But it's an improvement for sure.
Hmm, I'm not sure I'm understanding your comment. How do you think space is wasted and did you have an alternative solution in mind?
For the really wide assets that still have lots of space left in their rows - mapbanner.jpg etc. - they're being compressed down to a point where you can't see much detail. I guess I would prefer something more of a compromise like this:
But my CSS & flex are rusty so I may not be doing this the best way. Here's what it looks like:
I turned off the max-width and put overflow:hidden on the .asset-entry img (not at all sure why that's working...), and put max-width:calc(100% - 72px) on the .asset-entry, to always leave space for the "actions" buttons.
I uploaded an 1800x100 pixel banner and it's doing something untoward in the Assets table:
It looks like
.asset-entry img
has max-heights but not max-widths. My command of flexbox is rusty but I think you could squish the image if there's a long filename, but not squish the filename or overflow the box if there's a wide image. Somehow....