151

(13 replies, posted in PunBB 1.2 discussion)

Maybe I'm mistaken, but isn't the new javascript in 1206 always on?

Meaning each and every "external" rel link would be open with a frameset DTD attribute?

Well, URL are part of a software/website. If one localizes the website, one would also localizes the URL. It seems quite logical to me... I know I would, and in fact I will.

As for breaking links of course, that's the responsibility of the localization team to get it right the first time (post beta and RC). But I don't see why a locale should change in that area, unless it also changes in English.

A little feature request on the new rewrite system (and by the way, thanks for it... it should be much more robust on various platform for a number of people?including me, I was never able to fully debug the old one with Apache 1.3 and/or mod_ort).

Would it be possible to have the rewrite_rules.php file tied to the main language of the forum, and included in the (future) language pack?

That would:

- help non geek and newcomers, as they don't have to take the extra step after installing the lang pack (replacing the rewrite_rules.php by a new one, or worst, translate it themselves)
- ensure some consistency across forums sharing the same language
- ensure a good localization
- diminish issues with upgrades (as the major lang pack would be updated as soon as PunBB's core is updated)

But, to keep it neat and clean, an Admin option to use a custom rewrite_rules.php file in the backend would be nice (again, to keep the core native file untouched).

154

(14 replies, posted in PunBB 1.2 discussion)

Smartys has, but that deadline isn't up... yet roll

A CMS is a Content Management System; it's a system that allows you to manage content smile

A Portal... it's more gray... more along the way the old Yahoo was, some kind of page collection to access other resources.

That's the theory. In real life, a CMS is supposed to be more flexible, allowing you to create the website you want and need; while a portal is less flexible, you can enter the content you want but the content type and page layout are locked.

Textpattern would be a good example of a CMS, while Nuke is probably a good (as in: bad) example of a portal.

156

(121 replies, posted in PunBB 1.2 discussion)

foxmask wrote:

Will the hook system work almost as in Phorum 5.1 (§ 1.3 Hook) ?

A Pun's dev would answer more appropriately, but it seems that way yes (it's also like the way Textpattern works for example).

157

(73 replies, posted in General discussion)

MattF wrote:

What are the general opinions on the 'Email this to a friend' type link on webpages/forums? Trying to decide whether or not I should be a sad git and create a script for doing it. big_smile

Personally, I can't imagine why this would be useful. It takes UI space, and can be done by hand easily... and it's not done that often.

But I've had various clients asking for it from time to time, so...

158

(18 replies, posted in General discussion)

MattF wrote:
quaker wrote:

sound like danged if you do danged if you dont..

It would appear that's pretty much the outcome. big_smile I've settled finally on a small background image with the probability that it'll be slightly visible behind smaller favicons. Can't really find any other way. big_smile

The only clean way would be to check the size of the intended image, and giv the element with this backround this size with CSS.

Like:

.remoteImage {
width:$remoteImageWidth;
height:$remoteImageHeight;
}

CodeXP wrote:

a *proper* way to track read/unread topics (damn that timeout system in 1.2!)

Yes! I can't believe I forgot that one...

160

(18 replies, posted in General discussion)

You could do it server side (check, and output the appropriate src for the img tag in the html page displayed), but it will slow things down, probably a lot.

If this is for something specific (like remote avatars), I would do it server side but as a cron (once a week, a day, an hour, based on the common level of errors and the use)... just disable the custom remote avatar if they have gone 404. If not, CSS is probably the fastest way to go (use a background image behind the real one).

MattF wrote:

The search system could be modded on 1.2.* if it was a problem personally. smile

Well, anything can be modded. Heck, one can even rewrite the full PunBB's code... but if you want to use it, well a lot of people don't have the time and/or the skill to do it well (meaning neat, secure, and then to update to new PunBB version by hand since after some serious rewrite, even the patch util can get lost).

By fulltext, I'm assuming you mean searching for the entire phrase entered rather than splitting the words and searching?

I mean: faster (reallly faster), consuming less server resources, consuming much less database size, with built in ranking system; and more important than everything without the English-centric bug on apostrophe.

Utf-8 I already have, so that ain't on my list of concerns. smile

I do too, but I'm more and more annoyed by people not having it, and having serious charset issue because of that. Global utf-8 is going to be much quieter.

Atom feed I already have, and it works perfectly well for me. smile I never wanted granularity down to individual topic level, which is why I never wrote that in. Forums/categories and site are ample. If, however, I ever changed my mind, It'd be a doddle to add that functionality to what I already have.

Well, I like having people writing and full proof testing something for me. Maybe a 1.2 mod add atom feature, but is the mod author going to patch my installed forums to keep them up to date? smile

Granularity is not a major thing by far, but when one needs it, it's quite nice.

Clean URI, I personally have no use, need nor want for. Btw, doesn't that involve using httpd rewrite rules too, or is the method totally altered in 1.3?

I have use for it, and even if vanilla PunBB is already incredibly well indexed by search bots (and better than any other forum software out there), it will be a nice addition.

And yup of course, it uses Apache's rewrite.

Extension system. Again, couldn't really say as I'm yearning for it. It still has to be written, so it is just an alternative, (and somewhat more practical for someone who doesn't want to do any coding), method.

Extension is really the major one... anything someone wants, in time, in may be able to get it without screwing the core code. Since some mod are really, really ugly, and since security (read: updates) is a major concern to most forums, it's a key feature for a lot of people in my opinion.

Much simpler to install, uninstall, track, edit, at the very very least.

And of course, no more arguing about ?this new incredible feature we all absolutely must have in PunBB? (such as private messaging, aka the worst idea ever).

Honestly, there's nothing there whatsoever that rocks my boat. big_smile I'm not saying it's not better, btw, merely that I don't class anything in it as a personal want.

That's good for you, it means PunBB 1.2 is already perfect smile

MattF wrote:
FSX wrote:

1.2 is good too, not as good as 1.3.

Why? I've still not seen anything mentioned about 1.3 which has given me the slightest inclination to consider updating to it when it does finally arrive.

That's your prerogative, but I'm pretty sure you are (or will be, once everyone realize what's 1.3) a small minority.

Myself, there are several key advances I really looking forward too:

- MySQL fulltext search (i.e. no more slow, huge, and more important bugged search system)
- native and full utf-8 support
- clean URL
- granular ATOM feed
- extension system (i.e. modding without altering the core source), with multigroup capability being the front runner

163

(42 replies, posted in PunBB 1.2 show off)

zef wrote:

But then again how would the installation of the other forums be any easier?

There are several ways of doing that, the most common being the php loader (some people are allergic to FTP). But I don't remember any forum using this, or any other way that Pun doesn't.

I doubt it, but it's maybe already there somewhere as a mod. Look for MySQL fulltext search capability. Or,you could mod it yourself, I think it's a pretty simple thing in the php source (it wasn't a bug at first, for Rickard this was a feature).

Meowmeow wrote:

I meant that Rickard has ever said that PunBB 1.3 will be released in the end of 2007.

You mean 2006, don't you? tongue

Yup, apostrophe are used for other things than ?l??

167

(18 replies, posted in PunBB 1.2 troubleshooting)

Smartys wrote:

If it takes more than a year for a beta? I would eat more than a hat tongue

Noted.

tongue

Myself, I've stopped asking for this major bug fix, since it will be fixed in 1.3 anyway.

169

(18 replies, posted in PunBB 1.2 troubleshooting)

Smartys wrote:

Several years? I hope not tongue

Do you have a hat? roll

I don't think so.

171

(18 replies, posted in PunBB 1.2 troubleshooting)

Smartys wrote:

I would suggest changing to latin1 and then converting when 1.3 comes.

Yerk... another several years of latin1, that's ugly...

And 1.2 works (some little quirks here and there, nothing serious or data integrity shattering) with utf-8; every PunBB I set-up is configured that way.

Smartys wrote:

http://dev.punbb.org/

The page forgets to disclose a very important feature: full and native support of utf-8 unicode character set smile

173

(16 replies, posted in General discussion)

MattF wrote:

If the browser acknowledges that it accepts xhtm/xml, an object frame is used. If not, an iframe is used, so it should work across the Mozilla/IE range.

What kind of testing do you do for this?

I wander what a wget, or googlebot for example, would answer. I think it would be best to give a well formed, valid, xhtml as much as possible; and have a workaround for the few known UA that don't like the object tag.

174

(16 replies, posted in General discussion)

I would say making it a specific bbcode, and allowing this special code to be parsed only for a specific privilege. Yup, paranoia is good, but you should see some of the forum people out there smile

175

(16 replies, posted in General discussion)

It could be useful on some specific cases, however I'm afraid if this is left open to everyone it would be misuse (i.e. used everytime, everywhere).

One topic that come right to mind is an encyclopedia, or dictionary. Like, instead of linking to a Wikipedia article, one could pull it (or part of it) in his post, like a quote (but updated in real time, and without the copy/paste manipulations) to illustrate a point. However, this would need an API or some kind of microformat pull or local filter to pull data and not a full web page with all its crap (navigation, etc.).