Bug 26263

Summary: Style error on OPAC search results when item-level_itypes is set to bibliographic
Product: Koha Reporter: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer>
Component: OPACAssignee: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize>
Status: CLOSED FIXED QA Contact: Testopia <testopia>
Severity: normal    
Priority: P5 - low CC: jonathan.druart
Version: Main   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Change sponsored?: --- Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact: Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:
Bug Depends on: 25242    
Bug Blocks:    
Attachments: Screenshot of result list with bibliographic level item type showing
Bug 26263: Add column width to itypecol

Description Katrin Fischer 2020-08-20 22:54:33 UTC
When item-level_itypes is set to bibliographic, the OPAC results list splits 50 / 50 with the item type showing in the first half.

To test:
- Set tem-level_itypes to bibliogrphic
- Make sure you have the record level itemtype set in some records
- Search for them in the OPAC
- Verify the display issue in the result list
Comment 1 Katrin Fischer 2020-08-20 22:56:10 UTC
Created attachment 108771 [details]
Screenshot of result list with bibliographic level item type showing
Comment 2 Jonathan Druart 2020-08-21 13:47:39 UTC
Caused by bug 25242.
Comment 3 Martin Renvoize 2020-08-21 15:35:33 UTC
Created attachment 108833 [details] [review]
Bug 26263: Add column width to itypecol

We add a static width to the itypecol and set a matching max-width for
the contained image to improve the layout of the results table for
accessability and reactivity.
Comment 4 Martin Renvoize 2020-08-21 15:37:17 UTC
This patch has the side effect of enforcing a max-width on the item type icon images people are using..

I feel this is a reasonable caveat, but I'm not entirely sure how much those icons are customised or whether those that are customising them are using much larger sizes that may not scale down well?
Comment 5 Owen Leonard 2020-08-21 17:59:36 UTC
I think what this bug shows is that Bug 25242 was too wide-reaching. I think it should be reconsidered.
Comment 6 Katrin Fischer 2020-08-21 18:47:55 UTC
(In reply to Owen Leonard from comment #5)
> I think what this bug shows is that Bug 25242 was too wide-reaching. I think
> it should be reconsidered.

I agree, we should reconsider - can we limit the effect to details?
Comment 7 Martin Renvoize 2020-09-02 15:37:59 UTC
Marking as resolved as we reverted.
Comment 8 Martin Renvoize 2020-09-02 15:38:32 UTC
Note.. I still think the colwidth is better with this patch even with prior patch reverted..