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]: Custom boundary for autoSize in Popper #25264

Open
1 task done
miroslavstastny opened this issue Oct 18, 2022 · 5 comments
Open
1 task done

[Feature]: Custom boundary for autoSize in Popper #25264

miroslavstastny opened this issue Oct 18, 2022 · 5 comments
Labels

Comments

@miroslavstastny
Copy link
Member

Library

React Northstar / v0 (@fluentui/react-northstar)

Describe the feature that you would like added

autoSize prop in Popper settings currently uses overflowBoundary. Add configuration option for the autoSize to use a separate boundary.

That feature is required for a Dropdown component scenario.
Codesandbox with repro: https://codesandbox.io/s/v0-dropdown-overflow-vj5xzf?file=/example.js

The Dropdown list in the example has the following options applied:
positionFixed: true to allow the dropdown list to overflow the message it is rendered in
autoSize: "width-always" to fix the width of the list to match the dropdown input (required when fluid and positionFixed are used at the same time)
overflowBoundary and flipBoundary set to the scroll container to correctly flip the dropdown list
unstable_disableTether: "all" to allow the dropdown list to cover the input if there is not enough space

With this config the autoSize uses the overflowBoundary to set the dropdown list width which is incorrect:
image

Have you discussed this feature with our team

No response

Additional context

No response

Validations

  • Check that there isn't already an issue that request the same feature to avoid creating a duplicate.
@miroslavstastny
Copy link
Member Author

We should test and eventually fix in v9 first, only after that decide what to do next.

@JustSlone
Copy link
Collaborator

Agree, let's solve this in v9, then backport to v0 based on customer need / cost tradeoff.

I assume @microsoft/teams-prg is taking point given the assignment in board, correct if wrong.

CC: @smhigley and @microsoft/cxe-coastal

@msft-fluent-ui-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Because this issue has not had activity for over 150 days, we're automatically closing it for house-keeping purposes.

Still require assistance? Please, create a new issue with up-to date details.

@msft-fluent-ui-bot msft-fluent-ui-bot added the Resolution: Soft Close Soft closing inactive issues over a certain period label Apr 4, 2023
@layershifter layershifter reopened this Apr 4, 2023
@microsoft-github-policy-service

Because this issue has not had activity for over 150 days, we're automatically closing it for house-keeping purposes.

Still require assistance? Please, create a new issue with up-to date details.

@layershifter layershifter removed the Resolution: Soft Close Soft closing inactive issues over a certain period label Sep 3, 2023
@layershifter layershifter reopened this Sep 3, 2023

Because this issue has not had activity for over 150 days, we're automatically closing it for house-keeping purposes.

Still require assistance? Please, create a new issue with up-to date details.

@microsoft-github-policy-service microsoft-github-policy-service bot added the Resolution: Soft Close Soft closing inactive issues over a certain period label Jan 31, 2024
@layershifter layershifter reopened this Feb 1, 2024
@miroslavstastny miroslavstastny removed the Resolution: Soft Close Soft closing inactive issues over a certain period label Feb 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants