Re: PunBB without <table>'s
CSpotkill. Several posts ago you indicated that you were not going to use Divs.
27 2004-01-07 20:35 (edited by CSpotkill 2004-01-07 21:04)
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
ps21 wrote:
CSpotkill. Several posts ago you indicated that you were not going to use Divs.
Actually, I never said I wouldn't ... re-read it ;)
Just the same, I wanted to use them sparingly. But I was in a sticky situation. I could either use a few hacks in the CSS, to make the XHTML much cleaner and ensure that the page worked in stupid browsers, like IE 5.5, or use a few divs, dirty up the XHTML slightly, but have cleaner CSS and easier maintainability. I chose cleaner CSS. Sometimes you have to give up some theoretical benefits, for practicality's sake.
Note that even though I used DIVs, I used them in a semantic way ? they divide portions of the page, portions of the header and are named accurately to reflect what they divide. I could probably tweak it further and remove the DIVs but I was working more on getting the list of links at the top inside a true list and then positioning it pixel-perfect. At least I accomplished that ;)
CSpotkill
[I'll work more on it in about 9 hours. Time for some sleep!]
PS. I know, there wasn't much to be gained so far, since I've only reduced it by about %4. You'll see a more noticible difference when I replace the posts themselves with CSS. Especially when you consider the bandwidth savings of not having to send the same attributes and tags over and over again (like width) since they will be stored in a cache-able CSS file.
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
Really cool CSpotkill 
Will be interesting to see the final result.
29 2004-01-08 13:04 (edited by CSpotkill 2004-01-10 10:50)
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
Okay, I've updated it ... I was getting fancy with the HTML for the posts:
[Code Changed. See <cspotkill.com/puncss/>.I left in a few <br /> tags because I figure PunBB could parse and wrap paragraphs with <p> tags instead of using two <br />s. However, to work the way people expect, you'll need to keep a few <br />s, like in my example.
I couldn't use <code> tags and get it to validate, so I temporarily replaced them with <div class="puncode"> but I'll remove those when I lookup the correct syntax to "extend" xhtml to let <code> include <h4> and <pre> tags.
Also, I used unordered and definition lists to do the member info and post actions. I added "Author:" and "Title:", then hid them with CSS. This way if they don't have CSS, they will still understand what "CSpotkill" is ? because the "Author" column wouldn't exist without CSS 
It's largely still unformatted and untweaked, since I spent more time working on the HTML source this time. If it weren't for the pipe (|) characters at the end of the list items, it would look nice in a text-based browser too (I'm working on it).
Also, something you might overlook, every post is inside an unordered list, and the list item is the old anchor tag by using the id! Say you link to &p=2#p8452 ... it will automatically go to that post (the item with the id "p8452"), so no more empty anchors are needed
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
I've followed your work for a few hours now, look good
I'm not fully convinced yet though
31 2004-01-08 13:17 (edited by CSpotkill 2004-01-08 13:25)
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
Also, without doing any optimizations yet, I've reduced it by %20 from 4,634 characters to 3,794 characters (not counting spaces) just by removing tables. (From the <body> tag to the end of the first post on the page)
Cactuz wrote:
Will be interesting to see the final result.
It won't look any different, at least with Oxygen.css. Of course, it will be faster-loading and much easier to change, just pop in a new CSS file.
chacmool wrote:
I'm not fully convinced yet though
This didn't convince you either? ? Just wait. When I'm done the transition of the current page to CSS, I'll do my own version and it'll look much different from "Oxygen" but with the exact same XHTML.
Plus, once you're using CSS, it makes adding ECMAScript and using DOM for animation, toolbars, tooltips and other interactive effects quite painless.
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
I'm impressed though still not convinced.
IE5 - It falls apart
IE6 - The posts are expanding beyond the header row and left border next to email link is out of alignment.
Firebird 0.7 - Perfect so probably fine in Mozilla 1+ also.
Will test it in Opera 7 later.
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
CSpotkill wrote:
It won't look any different, at least with Oxygen.css. Of course, it will be faster-loading and much easier to change, just pop in a new CSS file.
I was thinking about the code, not the design my webbrowser will show me
Make it work better with IE though
34 2004-01-08 13:45 (edited by CSpotkill 2004-01-08 13:45)
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
Cactuz wrote:
Make it work better with IE though
It's nowhere near finished at this state. I'm just pointing out what I've done so far ... it'll take a day or two more, I expect. Maybe longer for the rest of the site, though I guess there's no rush
I did mention I hadn't worked much on the CSS in this version, mostly just the HTML ...
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
CSpotkill wrote:
chacmool wrote:I'm not fully convinced yet though
This didn't convince you either? ? Just wait.
Cool! (The page didn't work yesterday for some reason)
Don't fully understand how it works, byt anyway
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
Kennel. Would it be a good idea to start a new topic in the Coding or Discussions forum and then move the last dozen or so posts since it has all got rather a long way from the purpose of this thread.
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
ps21 wrote:
I'm impressed though still not convinced.
IE5 - It falls apart
IE6 - The posts are expanding beyond the header row and left border next to email link is out of alignment.
Firebird 0.7 - Perfect so probably fine in Mozilla 1+ also.
Will test it in Opera 7 later.
Update.
IE5 - Don't ask. I'll fix it up after. It's looking better a bit better than it was before, though. I may just use the box model hack after all ... but I'm not sure if I'll have to. Right now the main problems in IE 5 are the gaps above and below the posts. I'm not sure why they're occuring, yet ...
IE6 - The posts were expanding because of the code segment. They won't again, so long as your browser window is wider than 600 pixels or so. (Look again and see what I did ? just by tweaking CSS. I haven't touched the HTML since I posted it above)
As for the border beside the email link, it's puzzling. I've fixed it perfectly in Firebird and Opera 7, but it's just 1 pixel off now, in IE6. I'll track it down.
Firebird / Opera 7 - Perfect, after a few tweaks for Opera. The email-webpage-quote links aren't vertically aligned yet, but beside that, my build of Firebird puts a 1px white gap between the 2nd and 3rd posts. However none of the other browsers, not even IE5, do that.
We're getting there Eventually I'll break down what I've done into more managable "grid parts". That will make it easier to change multiple pages and not just viewtopic.php. I'll also separate the colors from the CSS to split it into a "framework.css" and an "oxygen-colors.css". That way, it's easier to change color schemes and add others, plus it will keep the main CSS file cached, thereby saving bandwidth and speeding up the site
38 2004-01-08 20:10 (edited by chacmool 2004-01-08 20:13)
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
Nice work
Don't like the scrollbars though... One more thing, add a:
border-top: 0px or something for punpost. I don't like the "double" black line there
Edit: Just noticed there are the same black line in this forum too...
39 2004-01-08 20:28 (edited by Auron 2004-01-08 20:36)
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
This is all very well but what if Kennel doesn't use CSS? If a MOD comes out it will have to work with the current way stylin is done and you'll have to modify all the styles/layout of the mods to fit in with your method of stylin/layout to fit with your forum if you fully adopt CSS.
If you plan on using any CSS hacks better read this first...
http://digital-web.com/columns/keepitsi … 3-11.shtml
This also shows browser support of CSS (NOT sure if its up-to-date)...
http://www.quirksmode.org/css/contents.html
Another interesting read on XHTML and CSS...
http://www.quirksmode.org/about/quirksmode.html
Auron
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
I don't think there's any way of releasing this as a mod. Maybe Kennel implemet it into the real code.
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
Auron wrote:
Anyway i think you should keep it how it is Kennel, okay, maybe make it all XML/XHTML code but forget the CSS if Spot wants it to be all done in CSS then knock yourself out. I prefer desiging stuff with tables.
I will not make any decisions on what to do until I see the end result. If CSpotkill can show that it is indeed possible to create the same (or virtually the same) look, but with more modern techniques, and that this doesn't look crap for people not using the very latest in browser technology, I will very seriously consider it for PunBB 1.2.
The biggest advantage I see with the CSpotkill's approach is that styles for the forum will be much more flexible. It will be possible to create styles for PunBB that alter the appearance completely (not only colors and a few widths and height here and there). This will hopefully make PunBB more attractive.
But, as I said before, we'll see when he's finished. I don't want to jump to conclusions.
"Programming is like sex: one mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life."
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
Kennel wrote:
Auron wrote:Anyway i think you should keep it how it is Kennel, okay, maybe make it all XML/XHTML code but forget the CSS if Spot wants it to be all done in CSS then knock yourself out. I prefer desiging stuff with tables.
I will not make any decisions on what to do until I see the end result. If CSpotkill can show that it is indeed possible to create the same (or virtually the same) look, but with more modern techniques, and that this doesn't look crap for people not using the very latest in browser technology, I will very seriously consider it for PunBB 1.2.
The biggest advantage I see with the CSpotkill's approach is that styles for the forum will be much more flexible. It will be possible to create styles for PunBB that alter the appearance completely (not only colors and a few widths and height here and there). This will hopefully make PunBB more attractive.
But, as I said before, we'll see when he's finished. I don't want to jump to conclusions.
Actually there is a far simpler way to make major changes to the look of PunBB and to make it skinnable without major code changes. I am working on it right now. All you need do is to parse a few more of the boards elements to main.tpl and put some of the html from the php files to into main.tpl. In short, make main.tpl more fully reflect the structure of the board. The idea to be able to shuffle all the boards major elements around, set styles for a lot more individual elements and distribute quite advanced skins which consist simply of modified versions of main.tpl and a stylesheet. In other words, many of the advantages of a full templated skinning system without the performance overhead. You even end up with less code since a lot of the duplicated html from the various .php files is put in main.tpl only once. Of course you end up with a main.tpl which is about twice the size of the existing one but I don't see that is going to make any appreciable difference to performance and the output pages are exactly as they are now. I have barely started this but the following should give some indication of what I mean though now I look at it, all those tables except for pun_main could easily be replaced with CSS.
<pun_announcespacer>
<pun_announcement>
<table class="punspacer" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="4">
<tr>
<td>
<pun_crumbs>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<table class="punspacer" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="4">
<tr>
<td>
<pun_pages>
</td>
<td>
<pun_postlinks>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<pun_main>
<table class="punspacer" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="4">
<tr>
<td>
<pun_pages>
</td>
</tr>
</table>BTW. There is actually a BBS system called ProxyBB which is tableless and which is XHTML 1.1 strict compliant. I got the details from Forum Insider. A link to the board is below but I warn you, it breaks in IE5. Strangely enough, it breaks IE5 in pretty much the same way as Spots re-coded PunBB does.
http://forums.proxywiregen.com/
Now for the minor rant. Even if friend Spot succeeds I still don't think its a good idea. I think a BBS system using CSS rather than tables is a great idea in its own right but simply using CSS to mimic an existing table based layout seems to be silly. A bit like installing Linux just to run a windows emulator. Much better to design a CSS based BBS from the ground up with a whole new approach to BBS design. You are also much less likely to encounter cross browser problems that way since they could be eliminated in the design itself rather than having to be coped with by hacks as an afterthought. A more practical approach for PunBb could be a hybrid solution. Remove tables for those elements that don't need them such as the header, spacers and probably the footers. Reduce the nesting of tables for the forum itself particularly where there only funciton is to create a border but keep the main output from the database in tabled.
43 2004-01-09 09:34 (edited by CSpotkill 2004-01-09 09:45)
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
chacmool wrote:
Don't like the scrollbars though...
I added them because with pre, it doesn't wrap by default. However, you could possibly tweak it with the white-space property.
chacmool wrote:
I don't like the "double" black line there ... add [CSS] ... for punpost. I don't like the "double" black line there.
Notice how easy it would be to modify the design? Even just removing the border. You don't have to worry at all about knowing the inner PHP code of PunBB at all. The only thing better would be the mod that ps21 is making, so we don't have to worry about duplicating our efforts in modifying the HTML too.
Auron, for the hack-related article, I've already read it. Here's a quote
These two hacks are safe. Netscape 4 and Explorer 5 Mac are not being developed any more. What we have now are, for better or (usually) worse, the definitive, final versions of these browsers. There will never be a next version that could make a mess of your pages.
Hacks against dead browsers are safe, but hacks against the living aren?t. None of them. Ever.
IE 5 and 5.5 are dead. IE 6 has already fixed the CSS bug in "strict mode" (See MSDN article below). When he's talking about CSS hacks, he means ones like this: CSS hiding hacks chart (Dive Into Mark)
For the browser support chart from QuirksMode, I've seen that also. I suggest you re-read the page and look for the paragraph that mentions "Quirks mode" vs "Strict mode" ... With browsers in "strict mode" there's much better CSS support than in "quirks mode". But he only tested for "quirks mode".
ps21 wrote:
Actually there is a far simpler way to make major changes to the look of PunBB and to make it skinnable without major code changes. ... The idea to be able to shuffle all the boards major elements around, set styles for a lot more individual elements and distribute quite advanced skins which consist simply of modified versions of main.tpl and a stylesheet. In other words, many of the advantages of a full templated skinning system without the performance overhead. You even end up with less code since a lot of the duplicated html from the various .php files is put in main.tpl only once. ... all those tables except for pun_main could easily be replaced with CSS. [Code Removed]
Sounds cool. If you did something like that, it might make it easier to have both worlds, a table-based layout and a CSS-based one, for those with a preference. However if you want to make PunBB more attractive to design folks, swapping to a CSS-based layout would be a dream come true. Then with knowledge of only CSS, or just a modern WYSIWYG editor, you can edit the layout entirely, no PHP or even HTML knowledge required ...
ps21 wrote:
BTW. There is actually a BBS system called ProxyBB which is tableless and which is XHTML 1.1 strict compliant. I got the details from Forum Insider. A link to the board is below but I warn you, it breaks in IE5. Strangely enough, it breaks IE5 in pretty much the same way as Spots re-coded PunBB does.
http://forums.proxywiregen.com/
I knew there'd be a CSS-based BBS somewhere ... and the reason why it breaks is because of a mis-interpretation of the CSS specification. See "CSS Enhancements in Internet Explorer 6" [MSDN Article] for details. This is why I'd need the box model hack to fix it for IE5 and IE5.5, but don't need it for IE6.
ps21 wrote:
... simply using CSS to mimic an existing table based layout seems to be silly. ... Much better to design a CSS based BBS from the ground up with a whole new approach to BBS design. You are also much less likely to encounter cross browser problems that way since they could be eliminated in the design itself rather than having to be coped with by hacks as an afterthought. A more practical approach for PunBb could be a hybrid solution. Remove tables for those elements that don't need them such as the header, spacers and probably the footers. Reduce the nesting of tables for the forum itself particularly where there only funciton is to create a border but keep the main output from the database in tabled.
Yes, it may seem silly at first glance, but once I'm finished, as Kennel mentioned, you'll be able to dramatically change the look of the forum just by changing a CSS file, without further touching the code at all. As for why I'm emulating it, it's so that you guys will take a CSS-transition seriously.
Personally, I find the table-based grid look to be very restrictive and I feel that as a web designer, there's an innovation in forum design coming, but won't happen until programmers learn more about web design and specifically implement a CSS-based layout with separation of code, both PHP and HTML, and CSS layout files, so that true web designers can play and tweak designs. Imagine CSS Zen Garden for PunBB? You can even do javascript-like image hovers and drop down menus, even tabs, with just CSS. Read alistapart for details.
Also, of course if you design a CSS style from scratch it will have less cross-browser problems, because you can avoid the box model error. However if you want pixel-perfect layout in IE5 with CSS, you really have to use the box model hack, there's no way around it. (Ask anyone) It won't change, but it's no excuse not to use CSS ...
Anyway, I'll keep working on it. When I get something final, I'll post it here, then try modding PunBB 1.1 for it ...
44 2004-01-09 11:15 (edited by ps21 2004-01-09 11:40)
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
One slight concern is that althought a CSS design makes it much easier to make changes for the board it also creates more scope for CSS newbies to screw things up particularly if the stylesheet contains hacks. At the moment there is a limit to how badly the stylesheet could be messed up because the tables will still hold the whole thing together. A more advanced stylesheet could be bodged by an end user who most likely would not have the facilities to check it for cross browser compatability. However, that is a practical matter which could probably be overcome with a decent set of instructions and some decent comments on the stylesheet.
I was interested to see the comment regarding css navigation. By a strange coincidence I have come up with a navigation bar for PunBB which is based on Zeldmans menu as used on his site and ALA. The trick is to alter the function that generates the navbar so that it generates <li> tags rather than just links. The second trick is to set a variable in the function so that it can generate the links in reverse order to cope with floating right if required. I have even been playing with the sliding doors technique but as yet have not been able to eliminate the flicker in IE6 on XP.
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
ps21: I only wanted CSpotkill to make it look like the current table based design to prove to me that it can in fact be done. There is nothing that says we can't change the appearance to something more suited a completely CSS based design if we choose to switch to that.
The layout you proposed is an alternative. However, I do prefer a solution where you can change styles by simply replacing the CSS file. Involving the templates complicates things a bit. Multiple styles would mean multiple templates. Multiple templates means more work for people who have made changes to their templates to integrate PunBB into their website design. Also, I really don't mind the fact that changing the design would involve a lot of work on the code. We'll worry about that later :)
Edit: One of the things I don't like about a lot of other BB software is the fact that everything is based on templates. Sure, it is powerful and you can change the appearance drastically for every single piece of information that is displayed, but it's a pain to work with. Anyone who has worked with vBulletin will agree with me on this. I'm not saying your proposal is anything like vBulletin, but it is a shift towards a more template based design.
CSpotkill: Pixel-perfection isn't the main priority. At least not in my book. What I'm looking for is a design that is flexible and that makes life as easy as possible for people who want to create custom styles and people who want to integrate PunBB into their current website design. If aiming for that means the padding in some paragraph isn't 100% accurate in IE5, so be it.
"Programming is like sex: one mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life."
46 2004-01-09 14:11 (edited by CSpotkill 2004-01-09 14:42)
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
ps21 wrote:
One slight concern is that althought a CSS design makes it much easier to make changes for the board it also creates more scope for CSS newbies to screw things up particularly if the stylesheet contains hacks. However, that is a practical matter which could probably be overcome with a decent set of instructions and some decent comments on the stylesheet.
As I'd posted above, if we split up the CSS into a colors file and a framework (layout) file, it would make it easy for them to still change the colors while leaving the rest of the look intact. We could even add extra CSS files for the framework, such as moving from a left-to-right layout to a right-to-left layout easily, and you could still use the same colors css files with both ... adding options in the Admin panel perhaps, or tying it together with the language preferences.
ps21 wrote:
... I have come up with a navigation bar for PunBB which is based on Zeldmans menu as used on his site and ALA. The trick is to alter the function that generates the navbar so that it generates <li> tags rather than just links. The second trick is to set a variable in the function so that it can generate the links in reverse order to cope with floating right if required. I have even been playing with the sliding doors technique but as yet have not been able to eliminate the flicker in IE6 on XP.
The flicker is unfortunately an IE6 bug related to the caching preferences. You may be able to fix it with an HTA, but it's otherwise unfixable right now.
From Sliding Doors of CSS, Part II [A List Apart]:
IE Flicker: If you?re seeing a flicker of the images when hovering over the tabs in IE/Win, check the cache settings for temporary files (Tools > Internet Options > General tab > Settings button). You may have changed the setting from the default to make sure you?re seeing the newest version on every page refresh. IE/Win has trouble holding a background image steady on anchors if you?ve specified ?Every visit to the page? for temporary files. The default setting is ?Automatically?, which allows the browser to instantly retrieve the image from cache, preventing any flicker. Most users never change this setting; most likely, they don?t even know it exists.
As for reversing the order, just float the UL to the right and keep the LIs left floated, like what I did for the post actions (quote, edit, etc.). However, Opera follows the spec almost too literally with floats, so you must specify a width in Opera for it to display a float like other browsers. The only solution I've found so far is to use display: inline to keep the list on one line, like I did in the current PunCSS page. (Since adding a width would prevent us from adding extra "actions" for the posts or it would add extra white space on the right.)
There's a new "clickable fix", since the article was written. It's a method that uses an HTA for Internet Explorer browsers to enable the anchor-hover pseudo element on any tag. Works fine, except in IE6 SP2 ? probably because of some bug in Windows XP SP2 beta, or possibly a new security restriction for HTA/HTC, but I doubt that.
Kennel wrote:
Pixel-perfection isn't the main priority. ... What I'm looking for is a design that is flexible and that makes life as easy as possible for people who want to create custom styles and people who want to integrate PunBB into their current website design.
Got it. I'll try for accuracy anyway though. I might be able to fix it just by adding an extra div around the post Besides, that would make it more feasable to separate the posts from the parts around it in another CSS design.
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
Splitting the css files up into one for colors and one for "framework" seems like a good idea.
When I read what the two of you are discussing, I realize that my knowledge in the "art of webdesign" is severly limited. I really appreciate having knowledgable fellas like you to help out with this part of PunBB. Just so you know :)
CSpotkill: You've now been working on the topic view. Will it not be an enormous job to also do all the other pages? I mean, with this kind of design, the actual HTML only describes what content is to be displayed and hardly anything about how it will be displayed. There are a large variety of pages in PunBB (not to mention the admin interface).
"Programming is like sex: one mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life."
48 2004-01-09 17:59 (edited by ps21 2004-01-09 18:39)
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
Kennel wrote:
ps21:
The layout you proposed is an alternative. However, I do prefer a solution where you can change styles by simply replacing the CSS file. Involving the templates complicates things a bit. Multiple styles would mean multiple templates. Multiple templates means more work for people who have made changes to their templates to integrate PunBB into their website design. Also, I really don't mind the fact that changing the design would involve a lot of work on the code. We'll worry about that laterEdit: One of the things I don't like about a lot of other BB software is the fact that everything is based on templates. Sure, it is powerful and you can change the appearance drastically for every single piece of information that is displayed, but it's a pain to work with. Anyone who has worked with vBulletin will agree with me on this. I'm not saying your proposal is anything like vBulletin, but it is a shift towards a more template based design.
Point taken. The only reason I was proposing it is I have become rather attached to this script and would like to see it in as wide a use as possible. I am just worried that the inability to distribute real skins could turn out to be PunBB's Achilles heel. Being able to make a board look unique is no longer seen as a geeky thing to do, it has become something of an essential feature for a lot of potential users. I am wondering how many people who were impressed with PunBB's speed, clean coding and lack of bloat and who really wanted to be able to use it ended up downloading phpBB simply because of styling capabilities. Of course the ideal solution is skinning via the stylesheet but even with a pure CSS layout there has to be a greater subdivision of board elements to make skinning viable.
Perhaps I should explain why I started tinkering with main.tpl. I tried to do something fairly simple which was to wrap pun_main and the other box elements in divs to create 3d borders which would look good in all browsers (insert/outset doesn't). I got frustrated when I realised that it couldn't be done because pun_main/pun_footer etc include spacer tables so the whole lot got wrapped up in the divs. I am not necessarily advocating moving to templating, my real aim was to point out that by subdividing board elements and adding a few extra items to main.tpl even if the markup is left in the php file you make a fairly dramatic improvement to the skinnability of the board. I don't see this as a barrier to integrating PunBB into sites because the users are already having to edit main.tpl to perform the integration in the first place. What you could end up with is something like
<pun_breadcrumbs>
<pun_pages_postlinks>
<pun_main>
<pun_pages_postlinks>
<pun_footer>
<pun_footerspacer>
<pun_copyright>
As I said previously, even a css based design requires the various elements that make up the board to be subdivided to a greater extent to allow styling, at least, styling without using some very convoluted selectors.
I noted your comment regarding pixel perfect design and not being to bothered about how it looked in IE5. Thats why I was advocating a redesign more suited to CSS. That way PunBB could look different in the various browsers without looking broken.
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
In the end I can't see Kennel doing this any time soon with all the other features he's got to work into punBB. Like for instance changing how permissions are set for users and forums, should be all done from the admin panel. But the users permissions could still be done from their profile.
Back to the matter in hand, with all this CSS and do this and do that I can see the skinning of this board being more complicated than before. AND you mention skinning with any PHP knowledge, for a start you don't need to edit any PHP code to skin your board!
Auron
Re: PunBB without <table>'s
Auron wrote:
In the end I can't see Kennel doing this any time soon with all the other features he's got to work into punBB. Like for instance changing how permissions are set for users and forums, should be all done from the admin panel. But the users permissions could still be done from their profile.
I don't have any internal priority for the things to do for PunBB 1.2. A possible redesign is just as important as the other things. Also, "changing how permissions are set for users and forums" is not something I remember putting on my todo list :) Did I tell you that I was going to do that?
Auron wrote:
Back to the matter in hand, with all this CSS and do this and do that I can see the skinning of this board being more complicated than before. AND you mention skinning with any PHP knowledge, for a start you don't need to edit any PHP code to skin your board!
Skinning in terms of changing colors will be just a simple as now. Skinning in terms of actually changing the layout will be much easier and will not require editing PHP code (as it does today).
"Programming is like sex: one mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life."