Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature/ab#1296 fast check of decisions in decision detail dialog #137

Conversation

flostyl3
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Motivation and Context

How has this been tested?

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.

@flostyl3 flostyl3 requested a review from witchpou December 16, 2024 12:58
Copy link
Contributor

@witchpou witchpou left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Die Pfeiltasten sind teilweise doppelt belegt - d.h. wen der Fokus auf dem Textfeld ist, sollten die Pfeiltsten zur Navigation im Textfeld dienen, sie blättern aber weiter. Zwei Sachen sollten wir machen:

  • sind bestimmte Elemente wie Textfeld fokussiert, sollte die Navigation ausgeschaltet sein
  • vielleicht ist es besser a und d statt der Pfeiltasten zu verwenden, um diese Doppelbelegung zu vermeiden. Dann müssten wir den Nutzer aber irgendwo den Hinweis geben, dass er diese Tasten benutzen soll

@flostyl3 flostyl3 merged commit 5dd200b into main Jan 20, 2025
1 check passed
@flostyl3 flostyl3 deleted the feature/ab#1296-Fast-Check-of-decisions-in-Decision-detail-dialog branch January 20, 2025 14:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants