01 Jun, 2006, Conner wrote in the 21st comment:
Votes: 0
In regards to most of what I just posted, nevermind, looks like you changed layout on me while I was posting, this one's a vast improvment. :)

Though the part about the recent posts links that Dragona and I apparently both mentioned, still seems to apply.

And I noticed that you'd told someone in another thread (Code Repository Question) that we might need to search for our snippets and if we don't find them to go ahead and resumbit them, so I'll do that.
01 Jun, 2006, Guest wrote in the 22nd comment:
Votes: 0
Ah, yes. I saw what you meant when I logged in from work. It's the CSS information. Your browser probably cached the old CSS file and it needed to be refreshed to update to the new information.

I'll look into the recent posts thing, it's part of a smaller snippet of forum code QSF refers to as a "modlet", which in this case may not be completely up to snuff. But that's part of any shakedown for a new site.

And yes. Apparently when I ran the conversion for the post attachments, not all of them were located. Not really sure why either.
04 Jun, 2006, Justice wrote in the 23rd comment:
Votes: 0
Greven said:
I beleive the ellipsis that is used is part of the CSS3 specification, but apparently the validator that the link points to is for 2 or less.


The text-overflow attribute is part of the CSS3 standard. However it's used here to solve some layout issues with IE 5 and 6.

Alternatively a overflow:hidden; could have been used, but I suggested the ellipsis to Samson as a more elegant solution. (Instead of simply cutting words off, having a …)

Mozilla based browsers will simply clip the extra text off.
04 Jun, 2006, Guest wrote in the 24th comment:
Votes: 0
Greven said:
I beleive the ellipsis that is used is part of the CSS3 specification, but apparently the validator that the link points to is for 2 or less. Submitting the file to a css3 validator ( http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/valid... ) produces other errors, but the ellipsis errors are gone.


As Justice commented, the ellipsis is there to calm IE 5/6 into submission. Without it, IE would refuse to keep things within the boundaries of the boxes if the filename could not be word-wrapped. The CSS3 errors it gets claiming "empty string" are also from the same ellipsis tags, so I'm not sure what their problem is.

If we can't validate, then I'd just as soon take the css validation tag out because as far as I'm concerned, a working site is more important than being nitpicked to death by the W3C. Especially since all of those warnings it spits back are just plain stupid.

As far as the non-validating table in the files code, we'll get that one fixed. No reason it shouldn't produce valid XHTML in there.
04 Jun, 2006, Tacitus wrote in the 25th comment:
Votes: 0
Can you make the quick reply box fold or/and move the page navigation and stuff so that it is above it? If I didn't know you (samson) made the last post in this thread then I would have never scrolled down to find it.

Thanks,
04 Jun, 2006, Tacitus wrote in the 26th comment:
Votes: 0
It also appears that there is a bug with the recent posts. The two announcement topics that you have stickied stay at the top of the recent posts list on the side.
05 Jun, 2006, Zeno wrote in the 27th comment:
Votes: 0
Here are a few thoughts I've had. Ignore them if they've been mentioned:

-You should be able to fully edit your uploaded code.
-There should be an option to "link" codes if they are related somehow. For example, you would link various versions of a codebase.
-User profile should show various upload statistics, like # of uploads, last upload, average rating, and more. Also a link to search for all codes uploaded by that user.
-The top header ("Members, Search" etc) should be updated to have more relevant links related to the code uploads.
-What happened to the tree that was planned for the codebases? There should be a way to expand every directory in the code section to view all categories. That way we can just click one thing to get where we want to be.
-Code section needs Advanced Search. Search by uploader, # of comments, rating, etc.
-When viewing Code Descs, usernames there (like the Uploader) should link to their profile.
-Able to see # of times the code was rated.
-When rating, there should be an optional box to place text. If someone is going to rate my code for example, I'd love to hear why they rated it that and not just a number. Or maybe ratings should be merged into a comment.
-Flags on Code Uploads. These would either be pre-defined, or users could make their own (strings). An example would be "Runs on Windows". Take a look at Youtube.com for how user-defined tags would work.
-Recent Posts should not depend on user cookies. Instead, it should be like AFKMUDs homepage where it shows the last posts regardless of what the user has read.
-RSS feeds for code uploads and forum posts.

*Code tags don't like newlines.
*CSS still a little screwy? Sig colors are grey again, which doesn't go well with the dark blue.

That's all I can remember right now. :)
05 Jun, 2006, Guest wrote in the 28th comment:
Votes: 0
The ability to edit your own uploads is still being worked on. Should be available soon.

How exactly would the linking thing work? I'm not sure I follow what you're getting at with that.

User profile options are also in the works. The only thing that probably won't be feasible is an average rating. The result wouldn't have enough meaning to be worthwhile either, at least IMO.

What kind of links did you have in mind for the top navbar?

The tree… that may or may not still happen. The code needed for that requires javascript and the css controls for it are less than friendly and when we had it in testing it did poorly in cross-browser compatibility. Right now the layout of things is already hyper-sensative to small changes in positioning and that tree thing would require some space to display.

We'll look into a more advanced search. For now we figured author and title search was sufficient to get by on. :)
05 Jun, 2006, Zeno wrote in the 29th comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
How exactly would the linking thing work? I'm not sure I follow what you're getting at with that.

Like when viewing a Code, there would be a section:
Related Code: Smaug 1.4a, SmaugFUSS 1.7

Something like that. Not all code would turn out to be in the same section, so rather than looking for it, Uploaders could "Link" together codes.

As for the top navbar, I suppose I'll wait and see. One idea I had about that, was each user could customize it and edit the links there. So like, I could place a link to the Smaug code section. Etc.

Note: I will be editing my above post for more thoughts.
06 Jun, 2006, Conner wrote in the 30th comment:
Votes: 0
While I think having a recent posts thing that's not based on user cookie might be nice for the front page, I, personally, read posts generally by clicking the link for recent posts and really do like only seeing the ones that are new to me when I do so.
06 Jun, 2006, Guest wrote in the 31st comment:
Votes: 0
The recent post box on the right side only uses cookies when you're not logged in. Generally not very accurate either. Once you log in, it should be far better at telling you when something new has been posted since your last visit, and doesn't use a cookie to store that information. This is why you can come back days later and if you haven't read a topic, it will still be there waiting.
06 Jun, 2006, Zeno wrote in the 32nd comment:
Votes: 0
True, but I don't like how the posts disappear. Besides that, it's all good.
06 Jun, 2006, Guest wrote in the 33rd comment:
Votes: 0
They disappear because you've read them. That's how it's supposed to work. But, it would be just as easy to change the box display to show the last 5 or so posts, and have that never disappear if that would work out better. As Conner pointed out, one can always click on the link in the box header to see the full "recent post" display.
06 Jun, 2006, Zeno wrote in the 34th comment:
Votes: 0
Well even if I click the "Recent Posts" header and I've read the topics, nothing is shown on the page. The reason why I don't like them disappearing is because I normally glance over a topic at first, and then do something else. Maybe I would have gone to another link that the topic posted or something. So then later I would want to come back to the topic to fully read all the posts, but of course now I'd have to go find it since it'd be off the list.
06 Jun, 2006, Guest wrote in the 35th comment:
Votes: 0
Unfortunately that can't be overcome. If you glance at the topic, the forum has no way to know you didn't physically read it.
06 Jun, 2006, Omega wrote in the 36th comment:
Votes: 0
just a recommendation for a bit of control panel enhancement, and user-detail, by throwing in stuff like description, so that we can enhance user information.

Description would be nice so that we can throw in some personal information.
or perhaps Nickname, so that people will see that you may have more then 1 name, or something neato..

Just a small suggestion.
06 Jun, 2006, Tacitus wrote in the 37th comment:
Votes: 0
Samson said:
They disappear because you've read them. That's how it's supposed to work. But, it would be just as easy to change the box display to show the last 5 or so posts, and have that never disappear if that would work out better. As Conner pointed out, one can always click on the link in the box header to see the full "recent post" display.


Thats what I'd like to see.
06 Jun, 2006, Midboss wrote in the 38th comment:
Votes: 0
That does sound pretty good. A lot more convenient than it is right now. I have another suggestion, though I think it may have been brought up already - is it feasible to have the links on recent posts (or the last post links from the forum page, for that matter) to point us straight to that post, rather than the top of the thread?
07 Jun, 2006, Tacitus wrote in the 39th comment:
Votes: 0
I would have never realized thats what was happening if I hadn't read it here. Recent posts to me makes me think a list of the last few posts made.
08 Jun, 2006, Hades_Kane wrote in the 40th comment:
Votes: 0
Has a forum for people to advertise and such been considered? If not, that's cool, I just worry that as the site grows in popularity, you might have people doing that anyway in forums it isn't intended for.
20.0/119