Everade

Getting school flashbacks where you have to wait to move on because the stupid kids still don't get 1 + 1.
 
Fallback like @13. mentioned please.
Your product's main feature should be prioritzed above 2 bad browsers that form a minority.
Altough yes, safari is the 2nd most used browser, it's still only 18% of the world market (and declining).
So a fallback for these should do until it can be removed eventualy.
https://gs.statcounter.com/
 
It's not just a simple scrolling issue but an overall performance killer.

Getting school flashbacks where you have to wait to move on because the stupid kids still don't get 1 + 1.
 
Fallback like @13. mentioned please.
Your product's main feature should be prioritzed above 2 bad browsers that form a minority.
Altough yes, safari is the 2nd most used browser, it's still only 18% of the world market (and declining).
So a fallback for these should do until it can be removed eventualy.
https://gs.statcounter.com/
 
It's not just a simple scrolling issue but an overall performance killer.

Getting school flashbacks where you have to wait to move on because the stupid kids still don't get 1 + 1.
 
Fallback like @13. mentioned please.
Your product's main feature should be prioritzed above 2 bad browsers that form a minority.
Altough yes, safari is the 2nd most used browser, it's still only 18% of the world market (and declining).
So a fallback for these should do until it can be removed eventualy.
https://gs.statcounter.com/
 
It's not just a simple scrolling issue but an overall performance killer.

It would be better to use the native method everywhere and fallback to the JS-based method only when needed, so the majority of users of modern browsers won't experience problems just because of a minority of technically backward Apple browsers. It's very easy because native lazy loading works perfectly fine when used with JS-based method at the same time.

This is what scrolling topics with images in IPB looks like:
(Tested with 1gbit/s internet connection <10ms latency)

Why is this bad?
Text + Images + Scrolling = Forum
And this affects 3/3 of your product. (quickmath 😛)
What i'm trying to say is that, new features are cool, we love them.
But don't forget your roots, they need some love too.


Reason for the scrolling/loading issues:
IPB preloads the spacer.png file instead of the actual image, then it goes for the image itself.

This blocks all content from being rendered, because that's how browsers handle it, which results in a truly awful scrolling experience.
It's normal for community members to sometimes come up with a great piece of topic or post, which consists of many images to make it look nice and clean.
So it's not uncommon, i see this problem on my board all the time.
Todays browsers all feature native lazy loading.
 
Spacers' death shall be imminent. 
 

This is what scrolling topics with images in IPB looks like:
(Tested with 1gbit/s internet connection <10ms latency)

Why is this bad?
Text + Images + Scrolling = Forum
And this affects 3/3 of your product. (quickmath 😛)
What i'm trying to say is that, new features are cool, we love them.
But don't forget your roots, they need some love too.


Reason for the scrolling/loading issues:
IPB preloads the spacer.png file instead of the actual image, then it goes for the image itself.

This blocks all content from being rendered, because that's how browsers handle it, which results in a truly awful scrolling experience.
It's normal for community members to sometimes come up with a great piece of topic or post, which consists of many images to make it look nice and clean.
So it's not uncommon, i see this problem on my board all the time.
Todays browsers all feature native lazy loading.
 
Spacers' death shall be imminent. 
 

The dark blue buttons are barely readable.
These can be found in the Statistics pages.

I have people wanting to create more detailed Icons and Rank Badges.  The problem is that they are so small you can't see any detail on the images.  I think it would be nice to be able to view a larger image via lightbox from the users profile/badge page.

Hi IPS,
I'd like to make a suggestion to add a check box whenever upgrading an app to offer to automatically clear the system cache after an update.  I've notice that 98% of the time when I do an app update my site will slow to an absolute crawl until I manually clear the system cache.  It doesn't seem to matter if it is an Invision app or a marketplace app.  It would be nice when doing the upgrade to just check a box so that the script will auto clear cache when its done.  If this option is already available, maybe make it in a more obvious spot because I don't see it. 
 
Thanks,
Drew

There's currently no option to set icons being maskable or not.
And IPB, by default doesn't set the maskable attribute.

Google Lighthouse Audit as such doesn't rate the PWA setup as optimized.

Would be great to either set it by default in the manifest file, or add an option for us to set the maskable attritbute ourselfs.

https://web.dev/maskable-icon-audit/?utm_source=lighthouse&utm_medium=devtools
 
Of course, this isn't just about Google Lighthouse Rating improvement, but it also allows us to mask the icon 😉

Sent you a PM with all the details.
 

A new version of Lighthouse 6.3.0 reports this issue for best practice

Please comment.

Actually we can recompute badges for all members, but for an unknown reason some users do not get the badges they should and others got too much badges... 😑
In our case recompute all the members badges takes more than 3 hours (it has been long testing our rules system...), it will be useful if we could "rebuild a single user" badges/ranks set, for the users detecting wrong badges & rank attribution...
It may also be useful for testing purposes : tests the rules set on a single user goes more fast than on the whole community...

There's currently no option to set icons being maskable or not.
And IPB, by default doesn't set the maskable attribute.

Google Lighthouse Audit as such doesn't rate the PWA setup as optimized.

Would be great to either set it by default in the manifest file, or add an option for us to set the maskable attritbute ourselfs.

https://web.dev/maskable-icon-audit/?utm_source=lighthouse&utm_medium=devtools
 
Of course, this isn't just about Google Lighthouse Rating improvement, but it also allows us to mask the icon 😉

I have figured out that there is no meta description for the links with /page/XXX at the end
topics http://www.example.com/forums/topic/17589-whatever/page/XXX article comments http://www.example.com/articles/category/article/page/XXX blog entry http://www.example.com/blogs/entry/17589-whatever/page/XXX and so on I have lot of pages where Sign in... and menu structure is taken into description by Google instead of the content of the page. It looks messy in search results and does not attract users to click. 

Yea, it's extremely annoying that you don't see them all.

Reported it as well, they're asking for examples instead of actualy taking a look at it first.
What a bummer...
 
Update:
They've created an internal bug report. It's in boys. 🤖

Reported it as well, they're asking for examples instead of actualy taking a look at it first.
What a bummer...
 
Update:
They've created an internal bug report. It's in boys. 🤖

Hello,
I thought of some actions that I think would be interesting to have as rules, comment your idea.
When to fill in a specific profile field Join a specific group Specific date Add photo Day won Two Factor Authentication Referrals

I reported this bug about 2 weeks ago through the Client Area.



And the answer was this:
No comment....

Well it probably tells running the website with PHP 8.x finally triggered this old unnoticed bug. there is two parameter in templates that being missed to use. normally this error log should display to us long ago and dated back to early versions 😀. for me log appear after upgrade to IPS 4.6 and it is one of the problems that being fixed for 2.5.1. it will be roll out soon.

Why are invisioncommunity devs so blind for webp?

It's not like it requires any other extra work, since the compression of webp is already existant by nature.
Simply allowing webp by default shouldn't be the biggest deal, or is it?
It's already widely accepted by all major browsers, so there's no excuse on that anymore, especially not since you dropped IE support yourselfs.
But still, every request and any conversation about webp have either been put down, or ignored.

Could we please get an explanation why you're so anti-fast-web?
I'm honestly wondering why is that.
 
I'm also wondering if the spacer.png image load implementation is still best practice either.
Wouldn't it make more sense to add native lazy loading instead?
Really keen to live up to todays SEO standards and performance requirements.

You never bothered to read the main thread, obviously.
I've never asked for png to webp conversion with double savings for backwards compatibility, but for webp upload possibility and being actualy recognized as an image.
What you're talking about is an entirely different story.

This was never supposed to be nor become a debate, you're just offtopic.
Learn to read, accept the future.

Might be rare case for you. For me it isn't. It really isn't.
Just because cloudflare is the perfect solution for your personal project doesn't mean that it fits everyone.
Is it great overall? Absolutely. But it's not perfect.

Cloudflare might be great at optimization, but it doesn't KNOW nor SEE how the image looks like.
As such i prefer personal compression for optimal results. A machine doesn't understand images nor art. At least not for now.
In my case, Cloudflare only catches those pieces i haven't optimized myself.
I can save more space with personal optimizations where i want, and i can have the best qualitiy where i want.
Cloudflare is an image optimization fallback for me, not a solution.
 
Safari isn't an up to date browser, it's heavily outdated just like IE. I don't support that.
You do, others do, great, why not. I don't.
For me: double upload is at no point ever required. I save lots of space with webp.

And i repeat:
Cloudflare has nothing to do with the fact that we cannot upload webp as images to invision, anywhere at all.
-> Cloudflare doesn't fix the problem discussed in this topic.

Yes Cloudflare is glorious, i love it and use it too.
But it does not fix the very core of this topic and as such, shouldn't be discussed here.
It's a great hint for people who don't know about it.
But again:
It doesn't fix the problem discussed in this topic.

I understand that you don't need webp image upload support.
But others might. At least i do.

me: Alright?
you: Alright

k, thx, bye.

Cloudflare isn't capable of xxx to webp conversion in a dynamic website environment.  For example javascript.
Accessing the image directly might work, but Cloudflare has lots of issues when it comes to dynamic content.
This has nothing to do with the fact that not all images are optimized, but because Cloudflare isn't capable of handling certain cases.
CDN is always a great addition to automation and optimizations.
But it doesn't allow for much flexibility.
And how exactly do you think i'm saving processing power or storage, when i'm uploading a 10mb png vs a 5mb webp?
What has any of this to do with processing power?
webp is widely supported so double uploads are not really required. I'm not wasting space, i'm saving space with webp support.

Is Cloudflare flexible enough to optimize the webp compression per image? No.
Does it allow us to upload webp to invision? No 😉
I'm pretty certain that i'm at the InvisionCommunity here, and not at Cloudflare.
So please let it rest so we finally get the much needed webp support.
Thank you.