[TYPO3-content-rendering] CSS-Style IMGTEXT rendering issue

[Ernesto Baschny [cron IT]]

Kai Laborenz schrieb am 06.03.2006 08:30:

> thanks for your answer. I set the constant to "1" and it worked like you
> said. Very well!

> Ernesto Baschny [cron IT] schrieb:
>> On 04.03.2006 18:16, Kai Laborenz wrote:
> 
>>> I didnt change any defaults and edited a simple text w image element
>>> (intext left; colums: 1).
>>
>>
>> Do you have "imageTextSplit" constant set to "1"?
> ....
>> The problem is, if you set imageTextSplit to "0", the caption is
>> relevant to all images in the block and not to a single image. Which is
>> why that caption is placed after the whole imagewrap-block and not along
>> each single image. This is not the default in "4.0-mode", thou, so it
>> shouldn't usually happen.
> 
> I used the defaults - so as a default the constant is set to "0". I just
> installed a clean 4.0 beta 3 and changed nothing (as far as I know...
> :-) ).
> 
> So its not a bug but a less usefull default setting, cause it stil makes
> no sense to have a dl an not using the dd for image caption.
> 
> I suggest setting imageTextSplit to "1" in the constants.txt
> (alternativly setting the rendering mode not to "dl").

It is set to "1" in constants.txt, but only in the "4.0-mode". The bug
now comes from the wrong condition in constants.txt. I already mailed
the fix together with the caption-wrapping-fix to Stucki/Sebastian:

< [compatVersion >= 3.9.0]
---
> [compatVersion = 3.9.0]

This way you get the correct "default" if you choose the "new 4.0 mode".

>> Yes, this is a bug which I already fixed, sending the patch to Stucki
>> and Sebastian, we'll have to wait until they integrate it.
> 
> Ah - very good (didnt find anything in the bugtracker)!> 
> Can you sent me the patch as well (laborenz[et]sunbeam-berlin.de)?

Will do that.

> What bothers me (as a css freak)

Speaking of which, I took a book from my shelf here ("CSS-Praxis") and
noticed the author: "Kai Laborenz". What a coincidence, the world is not
that big! :) Nice book, btw.

> is that there are *a lot* of combined
> classes - some seem to me not really mandatory. Maybe there should be a
> constant like "cssUsage" with settings like "full", "reduced" and
> "none". But maybe this is something for the next version...

I think that is not needed in the default setup. We could provide (in
the docs) alterantive TypoScript settings that set less (or other)
classes. If a "css-freak" wants to configure the object with less
classes, everything can be changed via TypoScript, as All XHTML/CSS
comes directly from TypoScript.

What do you think? Do you have examples of what could be "optimized out"
while maintaining full functionality?


Cheers,
Ernesto