Our new Image Scanner and Discoverability AI keeps your community safe (Video) By Jordan Miller August 26 22
surinp3 Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Are there any plans on changing the advanced uploader from flash to HTML5? Wondering since flash is getting old and not used as much as before and also HML5 is a much better option for the times to come. Today flash is not directly supported by iOS nor Android anymore. So... HTML5 instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Cable Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 This is a good suggestion. I have seen many really great HTML5 uploaders, this would be a great change from flash to HTML5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 It seems to be a common misconception that anything that can be done in Flash can also be done using HTML5, but this is not the case. While HTML5 does provide a way to facilitate multiple file uploads, Internet Explorer doesn't support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surinp3 Posted September 18, 2012 Author Share Posted September 18, 2012 Awww. :( Forgot about that simple fact. Or repressed, it rather as IE is a no good, #¤%%&¤# browser. Will post in mods requests instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewis P Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Internet Explorer doesn't support it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that Internet Explorer on Windows 8 Metro/Windows 8 RT doesn't support Flash player except on certain sites (like Youtube)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surinp3 Posted September 18, 2012 Author Share Posted September 18, 2012 Posted a mod request here: http://community.invisionpower.com/topic/369414-paid-html5-multi-uploads/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmacleo Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 isn't an uploader (the file api )one of the specific items IE9 DIDN'T support? seem to remember people having to mess around building html uploaders to force IE9 and lower to flash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management Matt Posted September 19, 2012 Management Share Posted September 19, 2012 I want to move to Plupload when we switch to jQuery so you'll be able to use HTML 5 uploading if that's what you want or let Plupload auto-guess the best for the browser (HTML5, Flash, Gears or Silverlight) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surinp3 Posted September 20, 2012 Author Share Posted September 20, 2012 I want to move to Plupload when we switch to jQuery so you'll be able to use HTML 5 uploading if that's what you want or let Plupload auto-guess the best for the browser (HTML5, Flash, Gears or Silverlight) Now thats more like it. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Cable Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 I want to move to Plupload when we switch to jQuery so you'll be able to use HTML 5 uploading if that's what you want or let Plupload auto-guess the best for the browser (HTML5, Flash, Gears or Silverlight) Perfect :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13. Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 I want to move to Plupload when we switch to jQuery so you'll be able to use HTML 5 uploading if that's what you want or let Plupload auto-guess the best for the browser (HTML5, Flash, Gears or Silverlight) IPB will use jQuery instead of prototype? Perfect! Can't wait ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaCollision Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 It seems to be a common misconception that anything that can be done in Flash can also be done using HTML5, but this is not the case. While HTML5 does provide a way to facilitate multiple file uploads, Internet Explorer doesn't support it. Then, instead of trying to have the same functionnalities on all browsers, simply drop the multiple files upload on IE! (for instance, some CSS features are only viewable by webkit & mozilla browsers, and that's perfectly fine!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT Walrus Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 I want to move to Plupload when we switch to jQuery Will IPB switch to jQuery for IPB 3.4? As far as I'm concerned, the sooner the better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jυra Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 As long as I get to keep Flash as default since I still see HTML5 as a hipster gimmick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surinp3 Posted September 22, 2012 Author Share Posted September 22, 2012 As long as I get to keep Flash as default since I still see HTML5 as a hipster gimmick. A hipster gimmick in a way like HTML4 was to HTML3, yes. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan H. Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 Will IPB switch to jQuery for IPB 3.4? As far as I'm concerned, the sooner the better... I think 3.4 is going to be another iterative (small) release, so it's doubtful. The switch to jQuery is going to be a massive undertaking for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxxius Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 its gonna be in IPB 4 no doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT Walrus Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 I think 3.4 is going to be another iterative (small) release, so it's doubtful. The switch to jQuery is going to be a massive undertaking for them. Not necessarily. Both jQuery and Prototype/Scriptaculous libraries let you do basically the same things, only with a different API. It should be relatively straight forward to convert JS from using one library to the other. I've done this myself for several third-party scripts. If IPS has a programmer that knows both libraries and is good at JS programming, it should be a relatively quick job to do the conversion. Since the JS is relatively isolated and not that large, I would recommend that IPS code for both libraries and have an option to use the jQuery version on some pages and the Prototype version on others. That is, have two files of JS, each doing the same things only coded for either jQuery or Prototype. This way, IPB, by default, can use Prototype and they can have an admin option to use experimental jQuery (if available for the page and for those of us that are willing to test/use the jQuery version exclusively). When the jQuery version is stable, IPB can make that the default for some future release. Note that the transition doesn't have to be all or nothing. IPS could gradually provide jQuery versions of specific pages while falling back to the current versions, if jQuery version is not yet ready for primetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan H. Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 Not necessarily. Both jQuery and Prototype/Scriptaculous libraries let you do basically the same things, only with a different API. It should be relatively straight forward to convert JS from using one library to the other. I've done this myself for several third-party scripts. If IPS has a programmer that knows both libraries and is good at JS programming, it should be a relatively quick job to do the conversion. Since the JS is relatively isolated and not that large, I would recommend that IPS code for both libraries and have an option to use the jQuery version on some pages and the Prototype version on others. That is, have two files of JS, each doing the same things only coded for either jQuery or Prototype. Um... no. Running the two in parallel is not really an option. And I'm not sure if you've looked at the IP.Board JS libraries, but they're anything but simple and isolated. There's 635 KB of Javascript for the core applications alone (forums/members/calendar) amounting to some 24,000 lines of interdependent code, impacting just about every facet of the software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter F. Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 I think 3.4 is going to be another iterative (small) release, so it's doubtful. The switch to jQuery is going to be a massive undertaking for them.Um... no. Running the two in parallel is not really an option. And I'm not sure if you've looked at the IP.Board JS libraries, but they're anything but simple and isolated. There's 635 KB of Javascript for the core applications alone (forums/members/calendar) amounting to some 24,000 lines of interdependent code, impacting just about every facet of the software. Not to mention the need to give modders a decent amount of heads up as to which version it is coming in (assuming they don't want to break any application that uses prototype in conjuction with the prototype libraries IP.Board ships with) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmacleo Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 Not to mention the need to give modders a decent amount of heads up as to which version it is coming in (assuming they don't want to break any application that uses prototype in conjuction with the prototype libraries IP.Board ships with interesting, I wonder if this may actually require running dual for a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.