DataGrid: Group header column width fix #5815
Conversation
| @@ -2866,6 +2866,7 @@ internal IEnumerable<DataGridColumn<TItem>> DisplayableColumns | |||
| for ( int i = 0; i < orderedDisplayColumns.Count; i++ ) | |||
| { | |||
| var displayColumn = orderedDisplayColumns[i]; | |||
| displayColumn.SetWidthToNull(); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we should modify the Width here. What will happen when the user-defined the width on their side?
I think we should just change the Bootstrap CSS when the grouping is enabled on a table.
Here is an example from my comment in the ticket, as a reference:
.table-fixed-header table.b-table
{
width: unset:
}There was a problem hiding this comment.
"What will happen when the user-defined the width on their side?" -> that's exactly what the bug is about. When user defines width it inherits after the first column that was defined with HeaderGroupCaption. Now it tries to squeeze 3 (or what ever count) columns into the size of 1...
With width disabled on header group, users can still set the width by defining it by the width of the individual items (which is exactly what is done in the bug report).
The css fix messes up the layout on bigger screens for example (isn't stretching itself to 100%)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"What will happen when the user-defined the width on their side?" -> that's exactly what the bug is about. When user defines width it inherits after the first column that was defined with HeaderGroupCaption. Now it tries to squeeze 3 (or what ever count) columns into the size of 1...
I think @stsrki meant the user defining the width in a CSS file meaning that your solution would only fix by overriding any Width explicitly defined as a Parameter and not as a css defined rule targeting that column, is this not the case?
So if @stsrki solution with css also fixes the issue in the same way yours do. Then his solution has the advantage to also work over user's defined css. I'd personally take that approach if it works with no other issues.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Additionally, I'd make it clear somewhere that this feature does not work properly with explicitly defined widths and make sure that the user knows what will happen.
Somethign along this lines:
- By enabling HeaderGroupCaption any explicitly defined width will be ignored, etc....
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, even with my solution user can still get there (un)intended width as style or by class. There is no reason to do it by style - because user has dedicated Width property for that. If set by class, we can mitigate the effect by setting the width unset instead of null.
The css solution has side effects:
No header:
Header with issue:
When removing the 100% width (css fix)
My fix:
The css fix remove the 100% width, which is not intended (I guess) and will act differently on bigger screens. Maybe not important - you tell me.
My fix also doesn't keep the layout the same. But that is due to the fact that the stretching is now governed by the top header columns (header groups) - there are 4 of them and the stretching is happening proportionally to them, not to the lower header columns (as without the header group). Keeping the intended size of columns is only possible when the whole thing is not stretching (basically the css fix).
(My code still need some fixes, because it works with the column instance..)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is no reason to do it by style - because user has dedicated Width property for that.
This is the problem because a lot of users actually use Style directly, so for them, this fix might break their UIs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is no reason to do it by style - because user has dedicated Width property for that.
I agree, In my onion, never ever assume what the user should do. There might be a myriad of reasons why he would set the width through regular styling... and it's perfectly reasonable to do so by styling.
So unless we deem something as unsuported by the framework/product we're providing, then if it's available the user might use it and we might want to handle it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, right..
So we have two solutions, both with breaking change.
What about letting users to do their own styling on the header group cell?
something like:
<DataGridColumn Classes="what ever now user is responsible" IsHeaderGroup HeaderGroupCaption="Personal Info">
</DataGridColumn>And instead of taking the styling from the first DataGridColumn with HeaderGroupCaption="Personal Info", it would just take the one with IsHeaderGroup. This might actually simplify few things along the line.
Not a quick fix, but imo the cleanest solution...
Description
Closes #5804
The issue arises because the header group column inherits its width from the first header column with the specified
HeaderGroupCaption.In my opinion, setting a width on the header group isn’t necessary, at least from what I can foresee.The simplest solution is to set
Widthtonull. Simply removing the width from the Razor file (line 42 in DataGrid) won’t be effective, as the width is also applied throughStyleproperty.