[pLog-svn] About the template suggest.

BalearWeb balearweb at balearweb.com
Tue Aug 1 08:38:05 GMT 2006


The most commonly used arrows are the arrows
that we have in our browsers. Everybody knows
that << means go back one page
and >> means go forward one page. Nobody
discusses about that. So I think that the way paging
is working now is fine, it is the normal way paging works.
<< (go back one page) - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - (go forward one page) >>
The fact that page 1 is the newer and page 5 is the older it does not
really matter.

Now, what about << (go back one post) | (go forward one post) >>
This is where there might be confusion. Go back means showing the newer
or the older? Mark says that in CJK environment they always use the
right direction as the "newer" direction. But then we are using back
to the newer page and back to the older post and that might be even
more confusing.

To avoid this contradiction I suggest leaving the paging just as it is,
and when talking about postd, use arrows that pion upwards and downwards.

[upwards arrow] Newer post: "Title of the newer post"
[downwards arrow] Older post: "Title of the older post"

In the context of blogs, everybody knows
that the post that is at the beginning of the page is the newer and
the one that is below is the older. So using arrows that point
up and down is following the usual direction of newer (up) and older
(down).

What do you think?

Elena

Mark Wu wrote:

>It looks weird. In CJK environment, we always use the right direction as the
>"newer" direction.
>
><< Older (page) - 1 - 2 -  3 -  4 -  5 - Newer (page) >>
><< Older (post) | Newer (post) >>
>
>:)
>
>Mark
> 
>
>  
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: plog-svn-bounces at devel.lifetype.net 
>>[mailto:plog-svn-bounces at devel.lifetype.net] On Behalf Of BalearWeb
>>Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 11:04 PM
>>To: plog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
>>Subject: Re: [pLog-svn] About the template suggest.
>>
>>But that is not the "logic" that we use in paging.
>>What I'm trying to say is that we have to be consistent 
>>between the meaning of << and >> in posts and pages:
>>
>>Maybe we could use this solution:
>><< Newer (page) - 1 - 2 -  3 -  4 -  5 - Older (page) >> << 
>>Newer (post) | Older (post) >>
>>
>>
>>Jon Daley wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>    When I think next, I think next post in time, so I wouldn't 
>>>mismatch the next and previous like you did in your example.
>>>    I think next goes with >> and goes to the post later in time.
>>>
>>>Ex.
>>>I went to the store.  NEXT, I went to the bank.  Which came first?
>>>
>>>On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, BalearWeb wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Jon Daley wrote:
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>....I don't know which is the best choice, but I think
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>we have to be consistent.
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>    I didn't look at the bug report yet, but yes, I 
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>always thought 
>>    
>>
>>>>>it was strange that left went to the next post.  I 
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>thought maybe it 
>>    
>>
>>>>>was just Americans who would assume right means next.
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>I also assume right means next, next page, next day. The 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>problem is 
>>    
>>
>>>>what do you understand by "next post"? The post written 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>afterwards or 
>>    
>>
>>>>before the current post?
>>>>Normally the post that comes next in a page is the older, but
>>>>value=$post->getNextArticle() means the newer. So I think 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>that is why 
>>    
>>
>>>>the arrows Next is pointing to the left.
>>>>But I think we should leave it like this:
>>>>
>>>><p id="Nextpost">
>>>>      {assign var=nextpost value=$post->getNextArticle()}
>>>>      {if $nextpost == true}
>>>><a href="{$url->postPermalink($nextpost)}"
>>>>title="{$locale->tr("next_post")}:
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>{$nextpost->getTopic()}">&laquo;{$locale->tr("previous_post")}</a> |
>>    
>>
>>>>         {/if}
>>>>      {assign var=prevpost value=$post->getPrevArticle()}
>>>>         {if $prevpost == true}
>>>><a href="{$url->postPermalink($prevpost)}"
>>>>title="{$locale->tr("previous_post")}:
>>>>{$prevpost->getTopic()}">{$locale->tr("netx_post")}&raquo;</a>
>>>>         {/if}
>>>></p>
>>>>
>>>>What do you think? Its a sort of contradiction...
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>It doesn't look like the configuration option 
>>>>>trackback_server_enabled is used anywhere else in the code?  Does 
>>>>>setting this option to false actually do anything?
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>I have no idea. I suppose you are not asking me ;-)
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>More over I wanted to display the locale message 
>>>>>comment_html_allowed The config option you want is: 
>>>>>html_allowed_tags_in_comments, but I don't think this 
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>option, or the 
>>    
>>
>>>>>trackback_server_enabled are available to grab from the templates.
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>Never mind. In fact, I think I'm not going to allow any HTML tags 
>>>>until I can make sure that they cannot leave open tags and 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>affect the 
>>    
>>
>>>>layout of the blog.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>pLog-svn mailing list
>>>>pLog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
>>>>http://devel.lifetype.net/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>pLog-svn mailing list
>>pLog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
>>http://devel.lifetype.net/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn
>>    
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>pLog-svn mailing list
>pLog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
>http://devel.lifetype.net/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn
>
>  
>






More information about the pLog-svn mailing list