Issue 2461: Inverse-backgrounds events, optional ID
Status:  ExportedToGithub
Owner: ----
Closed:  Aug 2015
Reported by es...@inspired.no, Mar 15, 2015
Not sure if this is a bug, a gotcha or me not understanding the docs.

After hours of banging my head against a wall due to the inverse background area in my app not being transparent as in demos/background-events.html I figured out what I was missing: 'id'.

If 'id' is not specified the inverse-background area and the transparent area both have a green background. The area which should be transparent has a lighter opacity though. Just remove 'id' from the events in demos/background-events.html and you will see.

I don't really plan to use 'id' in for these events in my app but added them now off course. However:

1) is this intended behaviour?

2) The docs says "Events that share the same id will be grouped together when this rendering happens." and I don't really understand the result of that in this case. The way I intended to use this and as the example puts out it seems to me that 'id' is required? Perhaps that should be better noted or maybe it needs to be reworded?
Mar 15, 2015
#1 es...@inspired.no
That's 'id' in the event object if that was unclear.
Mar 16, 2015
Project Member #2 adamrs...@gmail.com
Having event objects share an ID is a way to group them together. Grouping is required in order to figure out the area that is the inverse of the union of related areas. Otherwise, you'd get lots of crazy overlapping like what you experienced when you omitted all ID's.

But in the case that all the inverse-background events you specify are already related, I can understand that an ID for each would be unnecessary. This could be an improvement: the ability to omit IDs for background events that area assumed to be related.
Summary: Inverse-backgrounds events, optional ID (was: Inverse Backgrounds "requires" id)
Status: Accepted
Labels: Type-Feature
Mar 17, 2015
#3 es...@inspired.no
Well the important thing for me is that it works. And it works great now that I understand it :) If it is too much of a hassle to omit IDs for inverse-background then at least the docs should be more clear that inverse-background requires IDs. I think just putting that in the docs is sufficient actually.

Current text: "Events that share the same id will be grouped together when this rendering happens."

Suggestion something like this : "For events that should form the basis of the inverse background an id is required. Events that share the same id will be grouped together when this rendering happens."
Aug 21, 2015
Project Member #4 adamrs...@gmail.com
Discussion for this issue has moved to the following URL:
https://github.com/fullcalendar/fullcalendar/issues/2726

This is because Google Code is shutting down. Apologies if you are being pestered with these notifications. This is a one-time event.

Happy coding,
Adam
Status: ExportedToGithub