Commons 1.0.6 and Slider Image Scaling

[vothsco]

Several members have noticed that image scaling behaves quite differently on the site since the upgrade to the slider functionality. Smaller images don't scale up like they used to. Here is a link to the thread:
http://commonsinabox.org/groups/help-support/forum/topic/slider-and-slider-related-issues/page/3/#post-3970
Not sure if this is a bug, or maybe a request for enhancement. Please see Helene Findori's post on November 18 noting how the new version is less forgiving of different size sliders.

[boonebgorges]

I've been looking at the code here, and the short-term fix looks like
it's as easy as setting the adaptiveHeight flag on the bxSlider init
method to false:
https://github.com/cuny-academic-commons/cbox-theme/blob/master/engine/includes/feature-slider/setup.php#L205

This change prevents the flex-slider wrapper itself from changing
height, so that the page layout doesn't get screwed up.

It does not reintroduce image-stretching, but personally I think that
auto-stretching images is pretty much guaranteed to look bad. What could
perhaps be changed is that the caption overlay could be pinned to the
bottom of the slider container. I can make this happen in the inspector
by setting

.slides li {
    min-height: 344px;
}

where 344px is the desired container height. This doesn't seem like
quite the right solution - should probably use a percentage, and make
sure the parent element has a height.

@Bowe @r-a-y What do you think?

On 11/18/2013 06:07 PM, vothsco wrote:

Several members have noticed that image scaling behaves quite
differently on the site since the upgrade to the slider functionality.
Smaller images don't scale up like they used to. Here is a link to the
thread:
http://commonsinabox.org/groups/help-support/forum/topic/slider-and-slider-related-issues/page/3/#post-3970
Not sure if this is a bug, or maybe a request for enhancement. Please
see Helene Findori's post on November 18 noting how the new version is
less forgiving of different size sliders.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#174.