We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
vm.priceSlider = { value: 200, options: { floor: 1, ceil: 700, showTicksValues: 70, // translate: (value) => { // if(value > 1) return value - 1; // // return value; // }, showSelectionBar: true } }
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/gfk1hzLp/ (fork this example and update the link)
The upper limit should not cross the ceil. The tick value label should also not cross the ceil
The upper limit is crossing the ceil, the tick value label is also crossing the ceil
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Yes this is a known issue with showTicks values that don't fit perfectly in the range. However, the upper limit isn't crossing the ceil as you said.
This option should be used with a correct value that matches the range: (ceil - floor) % showTicks == 0.
(ceil - floor) % showTicks == 0
Sorry, something went wrong.
Hi, the upper limit does cross the ceil if you click on the last tick point(not sliding the slider). This happens randomly not all the time.
Still, your range doesn't match the ticks value you specified.
@sushantt2099 I have work on a ticks refactoring that enables to position ticks at specific position: #426. Do you think it would match your needs?
No branches or pull requests
Steps to reproduce
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/gfk1hzLp/ (fork this example and update the link)
Expected behaviour
The upper limit should not cross the ceil. The tick value label should also not cross the ceil
Actual behaviour
The upper limit is crossing the ceil, the tick value label is also crossing the ceil
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: