It reminds me Ted Casablanca's show on E! Entertainment Television...
LOL
LOL
Working on the Discuss-o-Mat Code
- Thread starter Unimatic1140
- Start date
danemodsandy
Well-known member
Suggestion:
This has its pros and cons, but I thought I'd mention it:
What about an automatic resize for pics posted here? In other words, when someone posts, that the pic would only render up to a maximum size set by code?
This would make page loads faster, and might also decrease costs. The drawback I could see is that people here sometimes really need to post very detailled pics, especially when some tricky repair is being discussed. But there's no reason for a pic of somebody's new thrift-store goodie to be huge. Even those of us who have the means and knowledge to resize pics can be a little lazy about it (mea culpa!). Anyone who had a pic needing to be huge could post a link to it on one of the free hosting sites, or perhaps we could have an area where necessary huge pics could be posted, with pics in regular threads getting held to maximum size.
Remember, over half the country's still on dial-up; in fact, dial-up has regained some market share during this recession.
This has its pros and cons, but I thought I'd mention it:
What about an automatic resize for pics posted here? In other words, when someone posts, that the pic would only render up to a maximum size set by code?
This would make page loads faster, and might also decrease costs. The drawback I could see is that people here sometimes really need to post very detailled pics, especially when some tricky repair is being discussed. But there's no reason for a pic of somebody's new thrift-store goodie to be huge. Even those of us who have the means and knowledge to resize pics can be a little lazy about it (mea culpa!). Anyone who had a pic needing to be huge could post a link to it on one of the free hosting sites, or perhaps we could have an area where necessary huge pics could be posted, with pics in regular threads getting held to maximum size.
Remember, over half the country's still on dial-up; in fact, dial-up has regained some market share during this recession.
Hi Sandy, actually I've had the system been doing that for years. Any picture larger than 1000 pixels wide gets re-sized down to 1000 x 750. I chose 1000px as the max because very few monitors now are less than 1024 x 768, and detail is important here at aw.org.
danemodsandy
Well-known member
At Least...
...You thought it was a good idea - you just had it sooner than I did, LOL.
...You thought it was a good idea - you just had it sooner than I did, LOL.
lordkenmore
Well-known member
"because very few monitors now are less than 1024 x 768
There must be VERY few left. I think I have moved on past that standard, at least for my Internet computer. If I have moved on, it's safe to say a given technology probably is completely dead.
There must be VERY few left. I think I have moved on past that standard, at least for my Internet computer. If I have moved on, it's safe to say a given technology probably is completely dead.
toggleswitch2
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 23, 2008
- Messages
- 5,000
It's too big. Can you shrink it?
~Hi Sandy, actually I've had the system been doing that for years.
If one gets a red "X" (and no picture) when attempting to attach such picture/image, one simply presses "Review Message" TWICE [wait until the first one is done, and then the seocn one is done] and "le voila"! It gets sized to fit!
~Hi Sandy, actually I've had the system been doing that for years.
If one gets a red "X" (and no picture) when attempting to attach such picture/image, one simply presses "Review Message" TWICE [wait until the first one is done, and then the seocn one is done] and "le voila"! It gets sized to fit!
> If one gets a red "X" (and no picture) when attempting to attach such picture/image, one simply presses "Review Message" TWICE [wait until the first one is done, and then the seocn one is done] and "le voila"! It gets sized to fit! <
For some reason here on AW, for pictures to attach without the dreaded red "X" I need to type the text portion of messages first, then preview it, and *then* browse/attach the picture.
For some reason here on AW, for pictures to attach without the dreaded red "X" I need to type the text portion of messages first, then preview it, and *then* browse/attach the picture.
For some reason here on AW, for pictures to attach without the dreaded red "X" I need to type the text portion of messages first, then preview it, and *then* browse/attach the picture.
I'll look into that. Since I always type text to accompany any picture I'm uploading I've never seen that happen before.
I'll look into that. Since I always type text to accompany any picture I'm uploading I've never seen that happen before.
As I recall from my own testing a while ago, the broken picture problem occurs if one is not logged-in at the time a post is initially composed and picture attached. The picture uploads after clicking Preview, but the login prompt also comes after clicking Preview, and the picture breaks. Clicking Preview again (even repeatedly) does not fix the break. The picture must be deleted and reattached.
lotsosudz
Well-known member
Robert,
Thanks for all that you do. I've told you before I have been the president of a large mens club her in Sac., and know how much time and effort it takes. I apreciate it greatly, and also think you are a hottie!
David
Thanks for all that you do. I've told you before I have been the president of a large mens club her in Sac., and know how much time and effort it takes. I apreciate it greatly, and also think you are a hottie!
David
As I recall from my own testing a while ago, the broken picture problem occurs if one is not logged-in at the time a post is initially composed and picture attached. The picture uploads after clicking Preview, but the login prompt also comes after clicking Preview, and the picture breaks. Clicking Preview again (even repeatedly) does not fix the break. The picture must be deleted and reattached.
Thank you Glenn that is the bug I remember now, I'll have to fix that with one of my many rounds of code changes. Don't let me forget about that one.
And thank you David for your kind words
Now, OK help me test. Especially you guys with older computers and/or browsers or unusual browsers.
These links take you to three newly constructed Index Pages. The "new" part is not in how the page graphics should look or its colors, the new is all behind the scenes using CSS and XHTML. I realize that not all the Threads are there that are suppose to be, only ones that have been used today, that's because I'm creating a brand new Database system to make it much easier to add new forums in the future.
So here are the links:
The NEW Imperial Forum Index
The NEW Deluxe Fourm Index
The NEW Super Forum Index
Let me know if these look drastically different from the old standard index pages. Thanks everyone!
Thank you Glenn that is the bug I remember now, I'll have to fix that with one of my many rounds of code changes. Don't let me forget about that one.
And thank you David for your kind words
Now, OK help me test. Especially you guys with older computers and/or browsers or unusual browsers.
These links take you to three newly constructed Index Pages. The "new" part is not in how the page graphics should look or its colors, the new is all behind the scenes using CSS and XHTML. I realize that not all the Threads are there that are suppose to be, only ones that have been used today, that's because I'm creating a brand new Database system to make it much easier to add new forums in the future.
So here are the links:
The NEW Imperial Forum Index
The NEW Deluxe Fourm Index
The NEW Super Forum Index
Let me know if these look drastically different from the old standard index pages. Thanks everyone!
They look good with Google Chrome and Firefox 2.0.
Hey Robert, the new index is more difficult to read due to smaller print, and the purple instead of blue. Also, when a post is read, only the underline changes color, which makes it harder to tell which posts I've read already. Thanks for all your hard work. Tom
Thanks Tom, that's the kind of info I need. But the new index looks exactly the same as the original one on all three of the computers that I use (2 pc's and one mac).
So now to investigate further, what browser are you using and version???
Here is how the new index looks for me in Firefox:
So now to investigate further, what browser are you using and version???
Here is how the new index looks for me in Firefox:
Using IE version 6, on Windows 98 still. Just checked and posts are now showing up in blue again, and changing color after viewed, but print still smaller.
Looks great with IE6/Win2000, except I had to preview three times before the entire image was displayed properly. The first time I previewed, the lower 1/3 of the image was all colored blocks (unreadable), the second preview the garbage area was just the last 10% or so, and the third preview the image was perfect.
There I made some edits, did the size of the font's return to the same size as the old page on IE6? They look the same on Firefox, Safari and IE6 under Windows XP.
Jeff I have no idea why your browser would do that. When you say "image" do you mean just the Super Dial Pointer
or did you mean the entire text page?
Jeff I have no idea why your browser would do that. When you say "image" do you mean just the Super Dial Pointer
sudsmaster
Well-known member
Robert,
Looks fine here, on Opera v10.10 on a Windows 2KPro system.
"When you're not programming, we're blue..."
Looks fine here, on Opera v10.10 on a Windows 2KPro system.
"When you're not programming, we're blue..."
richardc1983
Well-known member
@ Panthera
Yawn? What is that all about?
Have you taken your medication today? You seem to think its ok to moan at the younger generation but as soon as its debated back to you, you dont like it and Yawn?
You are a hypocrite you practice what you preach!
Yawn? What is that all about?
Have you taken your medication today? You seem to think its ok to moan at the younger generation but as soon as its debated back to you, you dont like it and Yawn?
You are a hypocrite you practice what you preach!
sudsmaster
Well-known member
Enough!
This thread is about the software upgrades to the web site.
Take the kvetching to email.
Please.
This thread is about the software upgrades to the web site.
Take the kvetching to email.
Please.
Linux Mint 7, Firefox 3.0
I opened the super index from the links above. (new)
In a new tab I opened the super index from the discuss-o-mat page. (where you select imperial, deluxe or super.) (old)
By swapping between tabs I can see slight differences - the newer one has slightly more space between lines of text, so it looks clearer. Also the tab top shows "SANDBOX WASHER FORUM" on the older version and "Super WASHER FORUM" on the newer version.
It all seems to work fine.
Now I'll try it on Opera...
thanks Robert.
Chris.
I opened the super index from the links above. (new)
In a new tab I opened the super index from the discuss-o-mat page. (where you select imperial, deluxe or super.) (old)
By swapping between tabs I can see slight differences - the newer one has slightly more space between lines of text, so it looks clearer. Also the tab top shows "SANDBOX WASHER FORUM" on the older version and "Super WASHER FORUM" on the newer version.
It all seems to work fine.
Now I'll try it on Opera...
thanks Robert.
Chris.
richardc1983
Well-known member
sudsmaster
Yes I agree sudsmaster, perhaps Panthera should know this to begin with, it isnt me who is actually starting this, but I certainly am not going to ignore it when she does start it.
Yes I agree sudsmaster, perhaps Panthera should know this to begin with, it isnt me who is actually starting this, but I certainly am not going to ignore it when she does start it.
mistereric
Well-known member
Mac OS X 10.6.2 and Safari 4.0.4
Looks pretty much perfect. Yaay for databases!
Looks pretty much perfect. Yaay for databases!
laundryshark
Well-known member
Web Accessibility
Greetings, Robert:
I appreciate your efforts to improve this Web site, as I most definitely enjoy what I can share and what I continue to gleam. I am leaving you a resource list of Web accessibility sites that I often distribute to Webmasters of companies, organizations, etc. I won't link all of these, but would paste these below:
Accessible Digital Media
http://ncam.wgbh.org/publications/adm/index.htmlAdobe - Accessibility Resource Center
http://www.adobe.com/accessibility/CSS, Accesibility and Standards Links
http://www.dezwozhere.com/links.htmlHow can I tell if my Web pages are accessible?
http://www.freedomscientific.com/fs_support/BulletinView.asp?QC=488HTML Help by The Web Design Group
http://www.htmlhelp.com/NVA Certification Program
http://www.nfb.org/nfb/certification_intro.asp?SnID=1382072042Section 508: The Road to Accessibility
http://www.section508.gov/Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Home Page
http://www.w3.org/WAI/
These resources are invaluable for providing you the tools, tips, and techniques for improving Web accessibility. Overall, a good Web surfer, who is blind or visually impaired (often working with assistive technology), can navigate and interact with the Automatic Washer site, but may I share a few possible pointers?
Screen reader software, such as JAWS for Windows (www.freedomscientific.com/jaws) looks at the underlying codes, but cannot detect "painted" images and graphics. In other words, you might print or draw words and pictures, but these are "invisible" to the blind Web surfer. This is why alt tags and descriptive code and page labels are important.
Take, for example, the entrance link leading into the Discuss-O-Mat Forums. As read through JAWS, the coded label reads: ART/DOM-small. This should be revamped to read: Discuss-O-Mat Forums. Whether or not the "painted" image reads this clearly, I cannot tell, as JAWS and other assistive technologies, cannot decipher these, except for the underlying codes. Furthermore, I see that every other entrence link on the main page is labeled with Art/ or Image/. These should be relabeled to read: Videos, Audios, Museum, or whatever you have clearly intended for the "painted" labels to read. In other words, the underlying codes can be redesigned to have easy to read labels. When JAWS is used to access Web links, a "Links List" is pulled up to display the links as though one is viewing files. The first letter of a link label can be tapped so as to more quickly find the desired link. If most of the links begin with "Art," this makes the task more difficult. No doubt there is art on this site, but perhaps some alt tags should be used on each of the pages so I would know just what kinds of pictures are being shown.
Again, the above resources are provided for your use in further Web site improvements.
--Laundry Shark
Greetings, Robert:
I appreciate your efforts to improve this Web site, as I most definitely enjoy what I can share and what I continue to gleam. I am leaving you a resource list of Web accessibility sites that I often distribute to Webmasters of companies, organizations, etc. I won't link all of these, but would paste these below:
Accessible Digital Media
http://ncam.wgbh.org/publications/adm/index.htmlAdobe - Accessibility Resource Center
http://www.adobe.com/accessibility/CSS, Accesibility and Standards Links
http://www.dezwozhere.com/links.htmlHow can I tell if my Web pages are accessible?
http://www.freedomscientific.com/fs_support/BulletinView.asp?QC=488HTML Help by The Web Design Group
http://www.htmlhelp.com/NVA Certification Program
http://www.nfb.org/nfb/certification_intro.asp?SnID=1382072042Section 508: The Road to Accessibility
http://www.section508.gov/Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Home Page
http://www.w3.org/WAI/
These resources are invaluable for providing you the tools, tips, and techniques for improving Web accessibility. Overall, a good Web surfer, who is blind or visually impaired (often working with assistive technology), can navigate and interact with the Automatic Washer site, but may I share a few possible pointers?
Screen reader software, such as JAWS for Windows (www.freedomscientific.com/jaws) looks at the underlying codes, but cannot detect "painted" images and graphics. In other words, you might print or draw words and pictures, but these are "invisible" to the blind Web surfer. This is why alt tags and descriptive code and page labels are important.
Take, for example, the entrance link leading into the Discuss-O-Mat Forums. As read through JAWS, the coded label reads: ART/DOM-small. This should be revamped to read: Discuss-O-Mat Forums. Whether or not the "painted" image reads this clearly, I cannot tell, as JAWS and other assistive technologies, cannot decipher these, except for the underlying codes. Furthermore, I see that every other entrence link on the main page is labeled with Art/ or Image/. These should be relabeled to read: Videos, Audios, Museum, or whatever you have clearly intended for the "painted" labels to read. In other words, the underlying codes can be redesigned to have easy to read labels. When JAWS is used to access Web links, a "Links List" is pulled up to display the links as though one is viewing files. The first letter of a link label can be tapped so as to more quickly find the desired link. If most of the links begin with "Art," this makes the task more difficult. No doubt there is art on this site, but perhaps some alt tags should be used on each of the pages so I would know just what kinds of pictures are being shown.
Again, the above resources are provided for your use in further Web site improvements.
--Laundry Shark
Yay for Databases is right Eric, this will make adding new features easier (at least some new features).
Hey Shark, thank you for the feedback. I'll tell you what if you provide me with a list of Image/ALT tags and what you think would be a good name for them I will certainly update those tags to make the site easier for you to understand.
I assume by lack of posts that for the most part everyone can see those links ok. In a few days after those pages fill with data I will go ahead and begin using them. That is step one of many to upgrade this site. Notice how much faster the Super Forum's new index page is filling up compared to the Imperial and Deluxe forums. ***grins***
Hey Shark, thank you for the feedback. I'll tell you what if you provide me with a list of Image/ALT tags and what you think would be a good name for them I will certainly update those tags to make the site easier for you to understand.
I assume by lack of posts that for the most part everyone can see those links ok. In a few days after those pages fill with data I will go ahead and begin using them. That is step one of many to upgrade this site. Notice how much faster the Super Forum's new index page is filling up compared to the Imperial and Deluxe forums. ***grins***
I assume by lack of posts
My blessed approval.. All looks okay on my screen with Vista . Go forth be fruitful and multiply LOL
My blessed approval.. All looks okay on my screen with Vista . Go forth be fruitful and multiply LOL
panthera
Well-known member
Robert,
No problems under XP, Vista, Windows 7 on Firefox and Chrome.
I don't use IE, so didn't check.
The middle of March, I'll be using Safari on ancient Macs and Firefox on Ubuntu as well as Solaris at our university, I'll let you know if anything turns up there, but I doubt it - your programming is clean.
Rickr, really - there is nobody here who doubts the depth of your feelings for me. Truly, you can stop any day now and I bet nobody will think the less of you.
Richard, I tried, without giving offence, to explain a few things which, in light of your postings, you did not appear to know. Having read the nasty screed you've posted to others here as well as myself, it was obviously a waste of time. Please have the kindness to stop abusing Robert's thread.
Oh, and, for your edification: 'Panthera' is a man.
No problems under XP, Vista, Windows 7 on Firefox and Chrome.
I don't use IE, so didn't check.
The middle of March, I'll be using Safari on ancient Macs and Firefox on Ubuntu as well as Solaris at our university, I'll let you know if anything turns up there, but I doubt it - your programming is clean.
Rickr, really - there is nobody here who doubts the depth of your feelings for me. Truly, you can stop any day now and I bet nobody will think the less of you.
Richard, I tried, without giving offence, to explain a few things which, in light of your postings, you did not appear to know. Having read the nasty screed you've posted to others here as well as myself, it was obviously a waste of time. Please have the kindness to stop abusing Robert's thread.
Oh, and, for your edification: 'Panthera' is a man.
Similar threads
