When editing a group offer, articles are marked red or yellow, when there are missing orders to complete the package and green when it is completed.
Articles, which I did not yet order, but for which there are free tolerance items from other groups, are unfortunately unmarked. I want to have them marked. The idea is to encourage groups, that order whole packages, to offer parts of the package to others. (I.e. to order less items and add tolerance instead). But unfortunately the others won’t see this in the list.
I have experimented with the situation you describe, and I agree that the UI can be improved here.
I would like to avoid adding a configuration option. Let us try to find an improved solution that covers all needs.
Choosing your “green” option just makes the current behavior more consistent. I think there is a bug concerning initial background color (after page load) vs. dynamically updated background color (after changing the amounts by clicking +/-): In the situation you describe, the initial background color is white. However, after clicking “+” and “-” once, the background color is green. Note: I am not describing the behavior of your modifications, but the current behavior of the demo.
I can observe the same inconsistency with only one ordergroup: After filling the package, the background color is green. After saving and re-opening the ordering form, the background color is white. Clicking “+” and “-” once, the background color is back to green.
I think that four colors (white, green, red, yellow) are enough. I would like to avoid additional complexity (for developers and users).
I would like to avoid adding a configuration option. Let us try to
find an improved solution that covers all needs.
[…]
Choosing your “green” option just makes the current behavior more
consistent. I think there is a bug concerning initial background color
(after page load) vs. dynamically updated background color (after
changing the amounts by clicking +/-): In the situation you describe,
the initial background color is white. However, after clicking “+” and
“-” once, the background color is green. Note: I am not describing the
behavior of your modifications, but the current behavior of the demo.
I can observe the same inconsistency with only one ordergroup: After
filling the package, the background color is green. After saving and
re-opening the ordering form, the background color is white. Clicking
“+” and “-” once, the background color is back to green.
I think that four colors (white, green, red, yellow) are enough. I
would like to avoid additional complexity (for developers and users).
So lets try to fix the semantics for the colors:
yellow: somebody (possibly including you) has ordered this article,
but there is one item missing to complete enough packages to fulfill all
orders.
red: As yellow, but more than one item is missing*
I feel like you are on the right track. There are some details about the colors that we could puzzle out, but I should not waste our time with the details: Code review and merging is usually done by @wvengen and/or @paroga.
Just a thought: Can we simplify the code by moving all “color logic” to the browser (ordering.js)? The server will send all rows with an empty css classname (i.e., white background), and javascript will assign all colors once the data are fetched. This way we can remove duplicate code, and we avoid inconsistency bugs such as the current one. I am not sure if that is a good approach, but I wanted to share that idea. If that idea does not simplify your current task then feel free to ignore it.
I opted for marking articles yellow, that free tolerance and are not yet
ordered by this group. The color for this specific case can be easily
adjusted in list.missing.css, see comment there.
Yellow fits well with the semantics “You get it, if you order one more
item”. However, yellow does not necessarily imply “If you order one
more, one more package will be completed” anymore.