Jump to content

Community

Makoto

+Clients
  • Content Count

    5,017
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    31

Reputation Activity

  1. Agree
    Makoto got a reaction from Linux-Is-Best in Could JQuery be replaced by vanilla JavaScript?   
    As JS continues to modernize and become more usable as a core scripting language, I feel like we'll see jQuery at the very least become superseded by something lighter and more powerful.
    But there's never likely a time where we'll move to just raw JS for complex applications. Some type of library will always be needed for the reasons Matt said.
    Those libraries will likely become lighter and faster, but they'll still exist.
  2. Agree
    Makoto got a reaction from Jordan Invision in Could JQuery be replaced by vanilla JavaScript?   
    As JS continues to modernize and become more usable as a core scripting language, I feel like we'll see jQuery at the very least become superseded by something lighter and more powerful.
    But there's never likely a time where we'll move to just raw JS for complex applications. Some type of library will always be needed for the reasons Matt said.
    Those libraries will likely become lighter and faster, but they'll still exist.
  3. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from Rikki in Could JQuery be replaced by vanilla JavaScript?   
    As JS continues to modernize and become more usable as a core scripting language, I feel like we'll see jQuery at the very least become superseded by something lighter and more powerful.
    But there's never likely a time where we'll move to just raw JS for complex applications. Some type of library will always be needed for the reasons Matt said.
    Those libraries will likely become lighter and faster, but they'll still exist.
  4. Like
    Makoto reacted to Rikki in Could JQuery be replaced by vanilla JavaScript?   
    jQuery is obviously not needed in 2021 - I'd love to do away with it. In reality, we have many thousands of lines of JS and the cost/benefit of rewriting everything for that reason alone isn't really there. Plus, we'd likely end up with a lot of helper methods that are essentially reimplementing some of jQuery's helper methods. We use some of the more advanced jQuery features too, so it wouldn't be as simple as updating .find to .querySelectorAll.
    So, the answer is: yes, I agree, but it isn't as simple as saying "let's do that".
    Also, in reality, if we were going to take the opportunity to redo our entire frontend codebase, we'd likely move to a reactive framework to build a better frontend, rather than simply rewriting what we have now but without jQuery. This will happen in time - we can't stay with the same code forever - but again it's about finding the right balance.
  5. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from sobrenome in Could JQuery be replaced by vanilla JavaScript?   
    As JS continues to modernize and become more usable as a core scripting language, I feel like we'll see jQuery at the very least become superseded by something lighter and more powerful.
    But there's never likely a time where we'll move to just raw JS for complex applications. Some type of library will always be needed for the reasons Matt said.
    Those libraries will likely become lighter and faster, but they'll still exist.
  6. Agree
    Makoto got a reaction from ptprog in Could JQuery be replaced by vanilla JavaScript?   
    As JS continues to modernize and become more usable as a core scripting language, I feel like we'll see jQuery at the very least become superseded by something lighter and more powerful.
    But there's never likely a time where we'll move to just raw JS for complex applications. Some type of library will always be needed for the reasons Matt said.
    Those libraries will likely become lighter and faster, but they'll still exist.
  7. Like
    Makoto reacted to Matt in Could JQuery be replaced by vanilla JavaScript?   
    Yeah, I agree. We picked jQuery a good while ago. If we were starting from scratch, we might pick something lighter now.
  8. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from Matt in Could JQuery be replaced by vanilla JavaScript?   
    As JS continues to modernize and become more usable as a core scripting language, I feel like we'll see jQuery at the very least become superseded by something lighter and more powerful.
    But there's never likely a time where we'll move to just raw JS for complex applications. Some type of library will always be needed for the reasons Matt said.
    Those libraries will likely become lighter and faster, but they'll still exist.
  9. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from sobrenome in We need webp NOW   
    FWIW if your users download images as WebP, they probably can't open/view them on their desktop either. Windows, at the very least, does not recognize WebP as an image format.
    You should avoid having your users download images in WebP format. Serving them in-browser is fine, but the original downloads should always be PNG, JPEG, GIF or so on until this changes.
  10. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from sobrenome in We need webp NOW   
    Anything that requires doing registry edits means it's not something that's accessible to the common user is my point.
    Until it just works out of the box, without needing you to manually enable anything, it's still a problem, and why you should work to avoid having users download files in WebP format to begin with.
    Me personally, I use Directory Opus as a drop-in replacement for Windows Explorer, which has its own photo viewer that is vastly superior to Windows', so the issue doesn't apply to me personally, I'm just thinking in regards to the average end user.
    This is not at all an argument against supporting WebP as an uploadable image format, just an observation.
  11. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from SUBRTX in We need webp NOW   
    FWIW if your users download images as WebP, they probably can't open/view them on their desktop either. Windows, at the very least, does not recognize WebP as an image format.
    You should avoid having your users download images in WebP format. Serving them in-browser is fine, but the original downloads should always be PNG, JPEG, GIF or so on until this changes.
  12. Like
    Makoto reacted to Linux-Is-Best in We need webp NOW   
    Fair point. Although I cannot test it since I no longer use Windows, I imagine Microsoft Edge could open a WebP without a reg edit. But I digress. Your point is valid.
  13. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from Linux-Is-Best in We need webp NOW   
    Anything that requires doing registry edits means it's not something that's accessible to the common user is my point.
    Until it just works out of the box, without needing you to manually enable anything, it's still a problem, and why you should work to avoid having users download files in WebP format to begin with.
    Me personally, I use Directory Opus as a drop-in replacement for Windows Explorer, which has its own photo viewer that is vastly superior to Windows', so the issue doesn't apply to me personally, I'm just thinking in regards to the average end user.
    This is not at all an argument against supporting WebP as an uploadable image format, just an observation.
  14. Haha
    Makoto got a reaction from Linux-Is-Best in We need webp NOW   
    Never.
  15. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from MEVi in We need webp NOW   
    WebP is amazing for lossless image compression (or rather, maybe you could say PNG is just really bad), but for lossy compression it's a bit iffy. It can sometimes beat out jpeg while preserving the same quality level but it's a hit or miss in my experience.
  16. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from OptimusBain in Searching needs significant improvement.   
    I'd like to throw a potential idea out here for my suggestion regarding searching by multiple tags.

    I believe a combination of the current system with something similar to what a system such as Danbooru or Gelbooru uses could be very useful for "advanced users."

    The only real problem with this idea is that it would require your members to learn how to use this advanced searching technique if they want to take advantage of it.

    You could consider it somewhat similar to advanced searching on Google. My idea is basically this:
    By default, when searching by tags, it works as it currently is. It will match any of the given tags. When searching by tags with a + operator, it will only return results that match all of these given tags. When searching by tags with a - operator, it will only return results that have none of these tags. All three of the above can be combined in a single search query.
    To offer some examples, a user could search for the following tags:
    +nature, +blue, -park

    This would return all results that match both the tags "blue" and "nature", but would not include any results that had the tag "park".
    This is a pretty generic and bland example, but it still shows the basic idea of things.

    What's different about my idea is that it adds in a bit of extra control and complexity. Another example,
    +nature, -park, blue, green

    Still not the best example, but this would do mostly the same as above. The difference is it would also only return results that have either of the tags blue or green with it. So, for example, it could match an image with the tags "green, nature", "blue, nature", or "blue, green, nature" all in the same search query.

    This may seem a bit overwhelming and overly complex, but I just figured I'd write my idea down here, since I might try and add in a similar system to my forum.

    Still, even if it is complex, I think adding in some type of system that would at least allow members to search tags with a "match all" option would be very useful.

    I've had many requests for this on my forum, as well as requests for the ability to block/ignore specific tags.
  17. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from OptimusBain in Searching needs significant improvement.   
    I've discovered another bug when attempting to search by post author alone.

    This is related to what Lucy was talking about, I believe.

    If you search a specific forum for posts made by a specific member and by title only, using only the author name and no addition keywords, it will return results that.. well, plain and simply don't make sense.

    Say I'm searching for posts made by the member Bob in the Fiction & Fanfiction forum on my site. I'm searching by titles only, not titles and content.

    Upon submitting the search query, you are returned results from all forums on your site, not just the Fiction & Fanfiction system. You are also returned random threads that the member has not started nor ever replied in.

    If you do include keywords with the search query, it seems to work just as Lucy suggested. It returns threads the user you are searching for has started, but not the ones they've simply replied in.
  18. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from OptimusBain in Searching needs significant improvement.   
    There's plenty of room for improvement in IP.Boards searching function.



    All in all, it's always been a pain for me to use. It's almost always easier to simply use a Google search on my site to find what I want. However, this is only because my site is well indexed by Google. Not everyone is so lucky. In this thread, I'm going to go through some of the problems I've had, in no specific order.


    My memory is fairly sub-par, so I'll likely recall a few other complaints and suggestions over time that I'll add to this list, but this is simply a thread to get a discussion started. A thread to gather feedback and gather comments and further suggestions from the rest of the community. A thread to hopefully drive more attention to improving one of the most basic and most used functionalities of many forums, searching.




    Relevance


    Have you ever tried to search for an app in the marketplace using the built in search function here? Let's give an example. Try and search for this app now: It's called "Links Directory," so you'd search for just that, right? Links Directory. Huh. It's not there. The title of the app is clearly "Links Directory," but it's nowhere to be found on the first page. Why? It seems to be simply because the search results are organized purely by the submission date, relevance has no factor here. The actual app is third to last on the search results page. A quick Google makes the page significantly easier to find. directory It comes up as the very first result.




    http://community.inv...inks-directory/







    https://www.google.c...links









    Searching by thread, not post author




    One thing I find rather annoying is that I cannot search by a threads author. You can only search by post author. So, say you want to find a thread started by another user.




    The only way you can go about doing this is searching by the post author. This will include all threads that the user has posted in. There is currently no way to search only by the threads author alone. A simple extra functionality that I'm interested in hearing others opinions on.




    This could be useful when trying to search for a story a user posted, a guide a user wrote, so on and so forth.








    Searching by multiple tags




    Currently you can search for multiple tags at once, but this isn't exactly what I mean. If you search for an image with the tags "blue" and "nature", as an example, it will return all images from the gallery with either the tag "blue" or "nature". Unlike with keywords where you can define to search for "all words" or "any words", you cannot search for posts that contain "all tags" or "any tags."




    This is a functionality that I would personally find extremely useful in my community, especially in the gallery and downloads system. When you have a massive amount of images or posts in your community to weed through, being restricted to searching by a single tag at a time can be very inefficient. When you have a community that makes intensive use of the tagging system, why should you be restricted to only searching by one tag at a time? Tags can be used to describe many things, especially in images, and this is why many popular image hosting platforms (such as Gelbooru) make use of this basic feature.




    My suggestion here is simple. Give the option to search for either "all tags" or "any tags," just as you can with keywords.







    You can't search archived and live posts at the same time



    . The technicalities of the problem are understandable, and it's more or less considered a "trade-off" for using the archiving system by most. Apparently, with some configuring, you might be able to get Sphinx to search in both tables.
    This is a functionality issue I've
    posted about before



    This also seems to be an issue already acknowledged by developers, but I'm simply posting it here for the sake of including everything I can think of in my list.





    (Bug) Searching by title and content in archives only searches by content.


    This is a bug and a problem I've just happened to come across. When searching by "title and content" for archived posts, it only searches by content. It does not search by thread titles. See the following example. I'm searching for posts with the keyword "Konata" that are made by the user "Shu" in my site's Fanfiction forum. This is what is returned when searching by title and content.


    Only one result. There should be at least several. This baffled and frustrated me for a while, until I happened to figure out the cause. Now, if we go back and search by content only, we'll get the same thing. But, if we go back and search by title only, see for yourself.


    The most logical conclusion seems to be that the search function refuses to search by both the title and content, even though this is the default option. Try it yourself. Go search for something generic in your forum archives. Search by both title and content, title only, and content only. See some inconsistencies with the results? This is just one of the problems the archiving system brings. It's a good idea, but there are a number of bugs and problems I've seen because of it, to the point I'm considering simply disabling it and unarchiving all posts on my board at this stage. It's still a relatively new feature though, so I can't really complain all that much about it.


    )
    (
    Bug report
  19. Thanks
    Makoto got a reaction from z929669 in Radical Tags   
    Hey @z929669,
    Sorry for missing your message. I do indeed have a 4.4 compatible release, though it doesn't receive feature updates anymore.
    I can either provide you with this version that you can install manually or I can have a refund processed for you if you prefer.
  20. Thanks
    Makoto got a reaction from OptimusBain in Advanced Tags & Prefixes - IPS 4.x   
    You can migrate over from Advanced Tags and Prefixes to Radical Tags for IPS 4.5:
     
  21. Thanks
    Makoto got a reaction from OptimusBain in Radical Tags   
    Unfortunately there's no way to add tags or prefixes to categories at the moment, I'm not sure if/when this would ever be possible either I'm afraid, as categories are simply not designed to work with the core tagging system.
  22. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from OptimusBain in Radical Tags   
    To provide a quick update, I've got most of the forum/category setting features implemented, and will be adding a script allowing you to import your existing configurations over from Advanced Tags and Prefixes as well.
    In addition, I'm reworking the application a bit so that instead of it providing custom formatting exclusively for prefixes, you can optionally add custom formatting to regular tags as well (so if you want color coded tags to display in the normal tag list, you'll be able to do that now!)
  23. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from OptimusBain in Radical Tags   
    Thank you for your purchase!
    Both of these features will be added in the future releases. Right now this is still an early beta of the application (hence the discounted price) and am working to make sure all the more basic features are functioning as intended first.
    Currently the application will format prefixes when selected using the regular "Item prefix" option in the tag menu,

    I'll also be adding in the option to require prefixes/select which prefixes can be used on a per-forum basis in the next release, but want to see if there's a way I can cleanly hook into the native "Item prefix" menu instead of requiring two different forms for it as happens with Advanced Tags and Prefixes,

    Keep in mind everything here was rebuilt from the ground up and naturally I can't just copy features directly from the old Advanced Tags & Prefixes mod, so when doing everything for IPS 4.4 and onward I want to make sure everything it's done to modern standards and in as user-friendly of a way as possible.
  24. Thanks
    Makoto reacted to Joel R in Hiring Someone to Optimize Our Site   
    Are you wanting someone to get you a better Google Pagespeed score?  Contact @Adlago
    Are you wanting to actually improve your site's actual interaction with users?  Contact someone like @ASTRAPI or @Makoto.  
  25. Like
    Makoto got a reaction from kazad63 in Advanced Tags & Prefixes - IPS 4.x   
    You can migrate over from Advanced Tags and Prefixes to Radical Tags for IPS 4.5:
     
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use technologies, such as cookies, to customise content and advertising, to provide social media features and to analyse traffic to the site. We also share information about your use of our site with our trusted social media, advertising and analytics partners. See more about cookies and our Privacy Policy