• Linux
• OS X

@ckrina and me were working on this to make a first approach to resolve the inconsistence of the styles. Here I attach one patch with an split of the «joyride.css» on two module and theme CSS including little tweaks on properties. To make a custom mark up to provide a component maybe we should override the definition inside of JavaScript file.

What would the best way to do that? Directly Override the jquery.joyride-2.0.3.js file or implement a cleaner / independent override on tour.js. or to post comments. Doutrina espirita. It looks like we can override the templates when we all the joyride file.

REST API PATCH or PUT. Ask Question. 16.2k 15 78 162. This was very informative to me. Custom CSS corner with lining. Steam Validation Rejected v54 - posted in Counter-Strike: Source. V53 to v54 using cumulative patch was bad idea tnx!!!!! Back to top; Report #9 hell911. The joyride CSS is far too overreaching, making the styling inconsistent with the rest of the Seven theme, the most obvious being the font family. I think we should.

Check I did a quick mockup of how it could look, it looks a lot better to me, what do you think? You can achieve most of this by reducing the default CSS and HTML. The header is Seven's h2 styling but white. The text is Seven's standard styling but white and with a reduced line-height - 18px seemed good to me.

The background stays rgba(0,0,0,0.8). The next button can use the button button-primary classes.

The background image for the close button can be found. or to post comments. Ok in general! I did the two tweaks in few minutes and I have a new patch ready. Although about the last comment I think to allow put minus margin at only 'left' and 'right' tooltips (which are misaligned) we would need a class in the general wrapper of the tip that marked the kind of tip. But now the TipLocation variable only is puts a classname on joyride-nub div inside of the general wrapper. And it doesn't work I've had a look at the tour.js but I don't see how to do that.

Linux

I'll try to further investigate but all the support are wellcome. or to post comments.

The PATCH method is the correct choice here as you're updating an existing resource - the group ID. PUT should only be used if you're replacing a resource in it's entirety. Further information on partial resource modification is available in. Specifically, the PUT method is described as follows: Several applications extending the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) require a feature to do partial resource modification.

The existing HTTP PUT method only allows a complete replacement of a document. This proposal adds a new HTTP method, PATCH, to modify an existing HTTP resource. I would recommend using PATCH, because your resource 'group' has many properties but in this case, you are updating only the activation field(partial modification) according to the RFC5789 The existing HTTP PUT method only allows a complete replacement of a document.

This proposal adds a new HTTP method, PATCH, to modify an existing HTTP resource. Also, in more details, The difference between the PUT and PATCH requests is reflected in the way the server processes the enclosed entity to modify the resource identified by the Request-URI. In a PUT request, the enclosed entity is considered to be a modified version of the resource stored on the origin server, and the client is requesting that the stored version be replaced. With PATCH, however, the enclosed entity contains a set of instructions describing how a resource currently residing on the origin server should be modified to produce a new version. The PATCH method affects the resource identified by the Request-URI, and it also MAY have side effects on other resources; i.e., new resources may be created, or existing ones modified, by the application of a PATCH.

PATCH is neither safe nor idempotent as defined by RFC2616, Section 9.1. Clients need to choose when to use PATCH rather than PUT.

OS X

For example, if the patch document size is larger than the size of the new resource data that would be used in a PUT, then it might make sense to use PUT instead of PATCH. A comparison to POST is even more difficult, because POST is used in widely varying ways and can encompass PUT and PATCH-like operations if the server chooses. If the operation does not modify the resource identified by the Request- URI in a predictable way, POST should be considered instead of PATCH or PUT. The response code for PATCH is The 204 response code is used because the response does not carry a message body (which a response with the 200 code would have). Note that other success codes could be used as well. Also refer tCaveat: An API implementing PATCH must patch atomically. It MUST not be possible that resources are half-patched when requested by a GET.