Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Arantor
1711
Features / Re: Pages: [1] 2 3 styling
« on February 2nd, 2013, 12:00 AM »
Suppose it were implemented. It would replace [<strong>1</strong>] with <span class="active">1</span> or similar, and there's two per page on a *lot* of pages. This says to me if it were implemented, even for just wireless, it would increase bandwidth use.
1712
Features / Re: Pages: [1] 2 3 styling
« on February 1st, 2013, 11:13 PM »
* Arantor wonders how much the gzipped content will increase as pretty much every page has two of these on it...
1713
Features / Re: Template edits
« on February 1st, 2013, 11:03 PM »
I see no reason why we need any more than one hook ;) It's called late on, just before control transfers out of Display(), so plugins can do whatever they need to at that point.

Functions... off the top of my head, the post area is built out of:

username (including menu)
title
badges
avatar
post count
custom fields
thought
message icon
title (including new icon)
reply count / time
content
like
main actions (including menu, quick modify)
signature

Interestingly, that's 14 items per post as I originally noted, which naturally translate into a few more functions than that.
1714
Features / Re: Template edits
« on February 1st, 2013, 10:05 PM »
Mini skeleton is certainly my preference because it really does mean it becomes customisable and that also means less in the way of support issues later on.

Location? Why not a separate file, post.xml because it's not every page (unlike skins which necessarily are)? Best of both worlds that way, I feel.

If you have a skeleton system, that's addressable by wetem or similar, it doesn't need automagic hooks, because there's already a hook available for display purposes. Extensions get hooked there, job done.
1715
Features / Re: Template edits
« on February 1st, 2013, 05:27 PM »
So, we want to add in 14 function calls per post we make?
Quote
<we:postlike>our like code</we:postlike>...? It's just a matter of determining how many macros we want to put into the loop.
Now imagine I want to totally trash that and replace it with something else? How do I do that from the macro, exactly? Normal template skeleton is easy: I just invoke wetem to replace that element.

I'd want to put in a hook for every item in there.
Quote
That one's more of a problem.
This is what I mean about having the flexibility of a template skeleton in there, because I (and others like me) will want to rearrange it. I'm trying, essentially to save us work in the long run by making this flexible and easy to change later on because I know people will want to change it.
Quote
PS: macros are already quite powerful as it is -- look at the <if:param> if anything. They *can* be extended. It's mostly a matter of determining what you want to do with them in the end, and what you don't want them to be able to do, ever.
Which brings me to my other problem. I don't entirely like setting rules on what people can and can't do with the platform. Having hooks necessarily puts limitations in and I want to minimise that where possible.
1716
Features: Forward thinking / Re: jQuery support
« on February 1st, 2013, 04:45 PM »
The main consideration is plugin authors. People are going to want to shove any old jQ plugin they find off the net into it expecting the most recent version. But jQuery itself has to be relatively mindful of its own legacy precisely because there's so much stuff out there built on top of it, so that major changes can't be done in a single version.

You say 1.4 has the features we need, but does it work with jQuery UI as bundled? Does that need rewriting/fetching an older version?
1717
Features / Re: Template edits
« on February 1st, 2013, 04:41 PM »
I'm not generally opposed to this in principle. There are two things that I want to specifically touch upon, though.

1. Performance is going to be impacted, though not *massively* with extra hooks per template/macro/whatever.

2. It's still way too simplistic and doesn't achieve any of the things I really wanted out of a mini skeleton.

It lets me change the markup for the things around the content, but it doesn't easily let me add new items with any control. Supposing I wanted to replace the likes feature with something else. How do I do that?

Suppose I wanted to add more icons to the poster information, in a separate area under everything else. How do I do that?

Suppose I want to move the avatar above the group badges, how do I do that?

These are all things that the mini skeleton, as I envisaged it, would solve (trivially) but it seems that macros wouldn't, at least as outlined.

Bear in mind also that macros are one-off replacements per page, not per post which means more complexity to be attached.
1718
Features: Forward thinking / Re: jQuery support
« on February 1st, 2013, 04:34 PM »
Quote
Sure. But just for that one..? Not worth it.
Of course it wasn't worth it just for that. But I can see the logic of a single unified beast for it.

The thing about it is that there's an awful lot of legacy stuff to keep in mind too.
Quote
I'm starting to wonder whether it isn't too early to switch to jQuery 1.9+2.0... I mean, I'm only thinking of the 'release date', it'll be okay in that fashion, but what was the reason for the switch, already...? Saving 300-400 bytes in v2.0 for non-IE browsers..? Only that? Or something else? lol...
I don't know... I'm fairly happy with what we have... *shrug*
1719
Features: Forward thinking / Re: jQuery support
« on February 1st, 2013, 04:11 PM »
The only thing I liked about .prop() for replacing .attr() was slightly saner handling of the checked attribute, as in you had to .attr('checked', 'checked') and .removeAttr('checked') to change it, but with .prop() it's simpler and could be done inline with a ternary expression.

Other than that it seemed like a change almost for the sake of change.
1720
The Pub / Re: Remove flash dependency from AeMe?
« on February 1st, 2013, 04:09 PM »
They actually withdrew people from the beta without telling some of them, mostly because they had issues with showing ads with it...
1721
Archived fixes / Re: sb refresh does not update scrollbar
« on February 1st, 2013, 04:09 PM »
Quote
Is it enabled by default? I don't remember... It's neither something for a 'forum for dummies' ("HTMwhat?"), neither for techies ("why can't I post my HTML code to the forum?")...
It's not enabled by default but it was enabled on Noisen and that was carried through here.
Quote
So... Doing it on the timezone one, for instance..?
It would - *if* the timezone selector were reinitialised for any reason after creation.

The calendar for example had[1] dropdowns for the day, month and year. The problem is that the day selector would need to be changed based on the month, e.g. selecting Feb would give you 1-28 (or 1-29), selecting January would give you 1-31 and so on. So it would adjust the select, then re-call .sb() on it to refresh it, but then it broke the selection as per the bug.
Quote
I'm starting to be ashamed of my select box code... (Apart from the fact that it holds the dubious world record for shortest select box with scrollbar and all :P)
Don't be. This scrollbar issue is a relatively minor bug. I really like it other than that one thing.
 1. It doesn't now, it has a proper date input selector.
1722
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on February 1st, 2013, 04:06 PM »
Quote
How is it so bad in comparison?
They have completely the wrong actors for it. In the original, Paul Eddington has a certain naive innocence while Nigel Hawthorne has the political machinations and his delivery absolutely makes the show what it is. Yes, the writing is very clever, but without his delivery it just wouldn't work.

I have actually tried to watch it and it's just not as funny.
Quote
And is the original Yes Prime Minister any good, too? (i.e. seasons 4-6 or something.)
Yes, it is. Essentially what's happened is that Sir Humphrey has manuevered Jim Hacker MP to being the Prime Minister and still directing everything, only now he has more power to play with.
Quote
because I don't have such excellent memories of The New Statesman, which was one of the first British sitcoms to be shown in English with subtitles in France
Ah, yes, Alan B'Stard. Not Rik Mayall's finest hour, I thought. The Young Ones and Bottom were both funnier, though by the time I got around to seeing The New Statesman it was several years past its cultural relevance.
Quote
The characters are well played, they're all likeable and the gimmick is interesting (i.e. starting the episode with the Minister trying to do something better for the UK, and ending up having to compromise because of reality checks.)
It's actually a reasonable criticism of our country, where the undersecretaries and so on wheedle the MPs into not doing things even if the MP has the best of intentions.
Quote
Well, as of now, it's much easier to implement into Wedge than it would have been if you'd had to disable cookies by default..! :^^;:
There is that.
Quote
Might be a good opportunity to get rid of PHPSESSID though :P
Well, I've been looking into that. We have two choices, we can ditch the session rewriter part (and rename sessrewrite!!) and leave the underlying handling for guests, or we can entirely remove sessions for guests for a massive performance boost overall.

I'm tempted to go with the first one because of how upset people get when their meaningless statistics are threatened.
1723
Features: Forward thinking / Re: jQuery support
« on February 1st, 2013, 03:16 PM »
*scowls at jQuery*
1724
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on February 1st, 2013, 03:15 PM »
Of course it is. (Yes, Prime Minister is also a good show but only the original incarnation. The remake is shite.)

I'd be fine with a core notice disabled by default - I just think we should include it for those who need it. I could even make it a plugin really... As long as it's available, easily, for those who feel they need it.
1725
Archived fixes / Re: sb refresh does not update scrollbar
« on February 1st, 2013, 03:08 PM »
It's nothing to do with where it comes from, it's a bonus feature of the parser. If you don't want that, don't enable it ;)

Easy enough to reproduce, have a <select> with at least 15 items, call .sb() on it the first time and it sets it up. Then call .sb() again.

The calendar is the easiest way to see it but it's not the only way. It's normally not an issue because most of the selectboxes aren't that long, or where they are, they're not re-initialised.