Enhance documentation for UI consistency and field widget layout in README, SPEC, and TASKS
This commit is contained in:
parent
a34229a6ae
commit
34a0627e76
3 changed files with 18 additions and 1 deletions
10
SPEC.md
10
SPEC.md
|
|
@ -21,6 +21,14 @@ Default: The PAM realm will be selected by default, but users can choose other r
|
|||
|
||||
Users will be able to create VMs by selecting from predefined templates. The script will handle the necessary API calls to create and configure the VM based on user input.
|
||||
|
||||
#### UI consistency
|
||||
|
||||
Field-like widgets should follow the compact Textual widget-gallery pattern used for single-line controls.
|
||||
|
||||
- Most field-like widgets should be 3 rows high by default.
|
||||
- There must be no blank spacer line between the field content area and the surrounding border.
|
||||
- Taller controls are only acceptable when a widget is intentionally multi-line or requires additional vertical content.
|
||||
|
||||
#### General
|
||||
|
||||
This screen will show the general configuration options for the VM, such as:
|
||||
|
|
@ -202,7 +210,9 @@ The script will include error handling to manage API errors, authentication fail
|
|||
|
||||
The script will be tested using Textual interaction tests with run_test() and Pilot. Business logic will be kept in a central module, and testing will include running pytest, ruff check .., and ruff format .. .
|
||||
Add snapshot coverage for default, loading, and error states.
|
||||
For form-heavy screens, use snapshot coverage and visual review to confirm that single-line field widgets render as compact 3-row controls and do not show an empty spacer line inside the border.
|
||||
|
||||
### Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
The script will be well-documented, summarizing changes and any unresolved UX concerns.
|
||||
Document any intentional deviation from the compact 3-row field-widget layout or the no-inner-spacer rule as an explicit UX choice.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue