11
GadgetMn
Re: How do I make a php block to display one particular news story?
  • 2004/3/21 9:25

  • GadgetMn

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 55

  • Since: 2003/7/15


Chainsaw,

There is already a module that wil do this for you. Checkout the Spotlight module.



12
GadgetMn
Re: Web Standards and Xoops Themeing Framework
  • 2004/3/4 22:04

  • GadgetMn

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 55

  • Since: 2003/7/15


Herko and Mithrandir make some good points here. Yes tables are fine for tabular data and CSS needs to be applied appropriately.

Unfortunately, supplying any old alt tag won't do. The last thing a blind person wants to hear is "spacer.gif", "logo.gif", "curvededge.gif". Presentations should have a ""/null alt tag. Meaningful images should carry meaningful descriptions. Instead of "Xoops Logo" it should say "Link back to home page". the other downside is that browsers wrongly interpret alt tags as tooltips, and developers cannot help themselves to use them that way.

It's also a valid point that accessibility is not the responsibility of the kernel, but of the developer/designer. However it must be possible for the kernel to assist in making this happen. Each menu item should carry a title= and the kernel must allow developers to maintain these, otherwise the dynamic elements will never be accessible.

There's a happy medium. It's just a case of finding it and unless we try we won't find out...

Cheers,

GagdetMn



13
GadgetMn
Re: Web Standards and Xoops Themeing Framework
  • 2004/3/4 8:40

  • GadgetMn

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 55

  • Since: 2003/7/15


drroso,

Thanks for that. Hadn't really thought about Plone. The idea of using Python and Zope is the biggest downer for me on that one as it has to run as the web server...

But you are right. The plone home page is clean, crisp an "modern" looking. Now why can't we apply that to our XOOPS sites...

Cheers,

GadgetMn



14
GadgetMn
Re: Web Standards and Xoops Themeing Framework
  • 2004/3/3 21:58

  • GadgetMn

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 55

  • Since: 2003/7/15


Quote:
Really I feel like CSS only sites are a kind of poor mans templating system.


It's this kind of negative comment which is going to prevent an environment where sites "just work" from actually happening. There is nothing "poor" about CSS. In fact it's achieved what software developers have been trying to achieve for 10's of years in just a few. The only thing stopping "web standards" from taking hold is the inability for browser makers to interpret the standards correctly.

To know that I only have to develop a single UI for my site, regardless of platform or browser is a god send and when you actually realise that it has been possible to do this since 2000 you have to start wondering why do I still mess around with complex tables, bloated markup script and wasteful "spacer" images that just clog up the web.

If all sites were compliant, the amount of wasted traffic flying round the net would be reduced by at least 50%. Just think how much quicker sites would load and the net would run in general (just think how muc more spam could squeeze through the pipes )

Forget about backwards compatibility and think about future compatibility. I've come to the conclusion that my sites should look as best they can in the latest browsers and merely be "acceptable" in earlier versions. Those who strive to make their sites identical in all browsers are only making life difficult for themselves.

We all know that NN4.0 and IE4.0 suck, and so do the people using them. Why should offer the best interface we can, without sacrificing those who have taken the trouble to upgrade by bloating the page weight for the sake of a handful of users - which if you look at your web logs will see it is just that!!!

Quote:
They help but are not nearly as powerful as a real templating system like Smarty


Excuse me? Smarty does not replace CSS but compliments it. I looked at the site you quoted (and the code) and smarty would have fitted in nicely there. All your menu's and CSS drop downs could have been pulled together a handful of lines of Smarty.

I'm convinced that CMS's such as XOOPS should be taking a stand and be pushing web standards. How many times have you seen users quibbling over uploaded themes because "they don't work in this browser" or "that browser".

Also, if XOOPS want to be here in the future then it will have to adopt CSS/XHTML as the W3C starts to wind down for support for elements such as <b> and even <img>. If the engine doesn't adapt then it will not survive.

And what about accessibility? Just run the XOOPS home page throughhttp://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/index.jsp. The exact response is

Quote:
"This page does not yet meet the requirements for Bobby AAA Approved status. To be Bobby AAA Approved, a page must pass all of the Priority 1,2 and 3 accessibility checkpoints established in W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0."


For all you Americans out there forget using XOOPS for any government sites as it fails Section 508 big time. And for the rest of us, it's only a matter of time until accessibility becomes a factor of our day-to-day life.

Remember - Google is the webs biggest blind user. Do you really want your site to be inaccessible to that user?

This is not a dig a Xoops. XOOPS is cool. I love it. I have spoken with the developers directly and know what effort has been put in to get it this far. To make its skin web standards complient shouldn't be too much of a task as we have access to the skin and all (well almost all) the temlpates, and as long as you create a "transitional" theme, there should be no problems with non-compliant modules.

However, if XOOPS turned out to be the first compliant open source CMS and the CMS evangelists discovered this, then XOOPS would be hailed from on high and perceived as a true adopter of the standards and a preacher of the future.

I plan to try and create a XOOPS CSS/XHTML theme based around the default theme. From here it should simply be a matter of creating new style sheets (take a look athttp://www.csszengarden.com/ and change its theme). I'll let you know the URL when I get it up and running and look forward to your comments, quotes and suggestions (and also your replies to this post...)

Cheers,

GadgetMn



15
GadgetMn
Module File for Not Found!
  • 2004/1/27 9:45

  • GadgetMn

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 55

  • Since: 2003/7/15


OK, I've searched the site and found a few threads around this. However they seem to be based around rights issues. I'm running on a local Win2K installation and the rights are set to "Everyone".

I am building a new module and I have probably missed something out. I've checked the 'dirname' and other simple checks buit still the problem persists.

Is there any documentation anywhere that describes what checks XOOPS is making to determine that it can't find the module...

Cheers,

GadgetMn



16
GadgetMn
Re: [help]failed to open stream
  • 2004/1/18 19:46

  • GadgetMn

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 55

  • Since: 2003/7/15


I just go this too. It's a Win"k thing. I know it's permissions just don't know where.

This is my first native W2K installation (without Apache)

Cheers,

GadgetMn



17
GadgetMn
Re: Concept: Sub-Modules
  • 2004/1/17 8:48

  • GadgetMn

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 55

  • Since: 2003/7/15


Quote:

Mithrandir wrote:
Integrating too many things in the core is something XOOPS is going away from, only adding things, which are REALLY basic - like user management, permissions, mailer, smarty, form classes - that kind of thing.


I totally agree. A rock solid core with everything else being modularised. I even think you should break out the System Admin module in to seperate "System Modules".

There are instances where I would like to tie the user administration in to the O/S user management or an LDAP system so I can provide integrated web mail for example.

There are also 101 different ways of managing content and e-mailing users. By having a system module layer, these could be replaced as long as they support the system API calls.

All modules would retreive data/information via defined triggers from the module.

$modversion['trigger']['name'] = 'functionname';
$modversion['trigger']['file'] = 'filename';


Or via a class definition if that's more efficient.

It would be down to the developer of the replacement module to encapsulate that call. It would have made SPAW integration easier for all modules or replace content management completely with a true CMS with content types, workflow, etc.

Cheers,

GadgetMn



18
GadgetMn
Re: Concept: Sub-Modules
  • 2004/1/15 22:23

  • GadgetMn

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 55

  • Since: 2003/7/15


The reason for raising this is because a friend of mine wants to develop a booking system that can manage a varying range of "events" from resource scheduling to advertising space. What he needs at the core is a well developed calendar and there are already a few out there.

Now if you could develop away of extending a modules capability without modifying the core of that module you could extend modules (and Xoops) far beyond where they are today. I believe this would be inheritence in troe oops terms

It would be better if there was a documented API that would allow modules to talk to each other which developers would either choose to respond to or not...

GadgetMn



19
GadgetMn
Re: Intelligent Blocks
  • 2004/1/15 22:07

  • GadgetMn

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 55

  • Since: 2003/7/15


True,

But if you're writing a module to be shared with the community or (as I have started in another thread) allow users to choose where they want the blocks, you need to be able to determine how the block behaves when it's displayed.

yes you can right blocks that are meant to be used left, right or centre, but why not add that extra piece of intelligence that asks "Where am I?"

GadgetMn



20
GadgetMn
Concept: Sub-Modules
  • 2004/1/15 21:54

  • GadgetMn

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 55

  • Since: 2003/7/15


I was intrigued when I used the related contents module. Here is a module that apart from a block has no actual usable application. It is a supporting module.

This then got me thinking about how to extend other modules without forking them. That's where sub-modules come in. The idea is to create a module that interfaces with an existing module and extends its capabilities through new blocks or additional sub-menu options.

This would obviously serve better as a core feature and could be published as part of the module API - allowing cross module communication.

Would this be something others would be interested in?

GadgetMn




TopTop
« 1 (2) 3 4 5 6 »



Login

Who's Online

223 user(s) are online (134 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)


Members: 0


Guests: 223


more...

Donat-O-Meter

Stats
Goal: $100.00
Due Date: Mar 31
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits