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.
7861
The Pub / Re: Wedge & SEO
« on March 31st, 2011, 10:49 PM »
Not from us, to be honest. We're not going to spend too much time rewriting it when we're not planning on using it like that. It does not bring anything useful other than serious extra load, and shorter looking URLs.
Consider: YouTube doesn't have SEO URLs and it hasn't lost out in traffic or hits ;)
Consider: YouTube doesn't have SEO URLs and it hasn't lost out in traffic or hits ;)
7862
The Pub / Re: Wedge & SEO
« on March 31st, 2011, 10:33 PM »
No, we will NOT do that. I am not adding possibly multiple database queries just to load the page.
7863
Other software / Re: So, I've been asked...
« on March 31st, 2011, 10:23 PM »
No, it doesn't mean that at all, Chris. I really don't want to argue with you, I have taken the action I deem appropriate for the situation.
7864
The Pub / Re: Wedge & SEO
« on March 31st, 2011, 10:21 PM »
So, you can see it's added here, and similar implemented in Wedge. It's a core feature, not enabled by default. And it was done to make the URLs nice, just that I won't use it myself.
7865
The Pub / Re: Wedge & SEO
« on March 31st, 2011, 10:02 PM »
-sigh- Pretty URLs IS supported but NOT for SEO purposes. It does not add significant ranking benefit. It is supported solely because it is nice.
7867
Other software / Re: So, I've been asked...
« on March 31st, 2011, 09:40 PM »
No, I removed it, followed by my message in reply. That way they can't accuse me of refusing to comply with a request and they can't accuse me of being uncooperative, i.e. the moral ground is mine.
7868
Other software / Re: So, I've been asked...
« on March 31st, 2011, 08:23 PM »+1, maybe JBlaze (he's still on the team) can quote the related topice / rule?
We could release some small mods and/or themes with the wedge-link in the footer
AFAIK there is no rule about competitor links in mods / themes but they'll probably never approve these.
7869
Other software / [Flames] Re: Dream Portal
« on March 31st, 2011, 07:28 PM »
Such things aren't retroactive though. Any release that existed with a BSD licence can still be used for that purpose.
7870
Plugins / Re: Plugin hooks
« on March 31st, 2011, 07:28 PM »
Mods can alter the content that's going *into* the template with out editing the hook itself. But that's only any good provided that you're providing it more of the same, or internally reformatting it for whatever reason.
If you need to extend the template in any way, i.e. do something other than for which it was designed in any way that can't be done through the exact markup provided, you either have to design the template to feed more from the source or allow it to be modified.
The former example, to 'feed more from the source', I'm thinking you'd make more use of stuff like GenericList for it; in order to make a given table more dynamic in terms of columns (new rows is easy), you'd need to move everything out of hardcoding the table structure.
The latter example is where you want to do inline some new content into the template.
If you need to extend the template in any way, i.e. do something other than for which it was designed in any way that can't be done through the exact markup provided, you either have to design the template to feed more from the source or allow it to be modified.
The former example, to 'feed more from the source', I'm thinking you'd make more use of stuff like GenericList for it; in order to make a given table more dynamic in terms of columns (new rows is easy), you'd need to move everything out of hardcoding the table structure.
The latter example is where you want to do inline some new content into the template.
7871
Other software / Re: So, I've been asked...
« on March 31st, 2011, 07:25 PM »Anyway, whether Pete gets banned or not or whatever -- if everyone here starts putting a link to Wedge in their signature, what will they do? Mass bans, like in January?
7872
Other software / [Flames] Re: Dream Portal
« on March 31st, 2011, 07:22 PM »And respectfully put, the vote was against to allow the inclusion of DP inside of any other software.
7873
The Pub / Re: Wedge & SEO
« on March 31st, 2011, 07:21 PM »Mobile phones with full browsing support and Touch Screens change things really.
H1, H2, H3 isn't really needed if your doing HTML 5 <header>/<section>. That's even better.
I'll argue the image height & width though. Without it, too much page jumping going on. Especially at slower speeds, or those with latency/server issues. Every little bit helps...
Alt attributes are still needed, even though they are not a requirement for HTML 5 Doctype.
Again, mobile phones, ipads, some netbooks, will not cache or even load most images over 25K.
I completely disagree with about 80% of what was said there.
See, to be honest, that's just "I disagree but don't have anything to back up arguing why I disagree"...
7875
The Pub / Re: Wedge & SEO
« on March 31st, 2011, 06:04 PM »
We're not overly interested in IE6 compatibility, and given suitable CSS declarations it should work tolerably well anyway...