Jump to content

IPS 4.0 Design wishlist


joelle
 Share

Recommended Posts

I read that as sarcasm as well. I think ADKGamers was saying, actually, that you know what you're talking about given your field of work. But I could be wrong.

The fact is, we have to keep up with the web. It's part of releasing web software. This won't change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think new designs are fine, but it would be nice to lock down the CSS as much as possible. No idea the current state but it sounds like hell to skin IPB because of frequent changes.

IP.Board should be taking a look at Discourse and take some feature ideas from there. Really great features that IP.Board could really work for.

A unified software architecture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I think new designs are fine, but it would be nice to lock down the CSS as much as possible. No idea the current state but it sounds like hell to skin IPB because of frequent changes.

IP.Board should be taking a look at Discourse and take some feature ideas from there. Really great features that IP.Board could really work for.

A unified software architecture.

I too like many of the features of discourse - especially a focus on posts, rather than categories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. On-click navigation in the ACP if it has drop downs. While I think hover menu's are sleek and sexy, they do not offer the same level of UI ease like an on-click one does. On-click simply works better and still offers nearly the same sleekness as hovers. If you disagree, at least make it an option.

2. IP.Content and IPB have the same shared classes, no more of this ccs_side block stuff vs ipsSideBlock and so on.

3. Easier to port Custom IPB thems to custom IP.Content Portals. What's lacking in the marketplace isn't forum themes, it's addon themes. I'm tired of seeing every single IPS powered website where all the skinner did was add 2-3 lines of code to IPB default areas in Downloads or Content or the Gallery. They didn't really 'skin' the products, and I want to know why. IP.Content or IP.Blog would probably be more actively used and accepted if 3rd party members had an easier time providing templates to users. I think IP.Content fails at this simply because of how much work is involved in packing something out and distributing it. And IP.Blog just doesn't have any good examples as a blogging software.

All I got off the top of my head right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...