Jump to content
  • 0

Is it just me or is there not that much going on??


Question

It seems to me not much going on in the forum anymore. Did the new format scare everyone off? I try to learn new stuff but I am having difficulty with this new layout. What does everyone think?? I have no control just want to keep the forum moving forward.

 

When a man is in the woods and talks and no women are there is he still wrong??:P

David

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Answers 26
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Posts

Well Luxstang, sounds like your done with the Mustang stuff, bummer. But you gotta do what makes you happy, so take care and good luck with your guitar building venture! Hope it works out!

Regarding the topic at hand: I took a year off the forum because my life basically fell apart and I had too much personal stuff going on.  Plus i don’t really care about my vert anymore (just mis

Couldn't have said it better. Good luck, health and fortune in the future Luxstang.

Posted Images

Recommended Posts

  • 0

@RocketFoot

Ok so I tried, and yes there are indeed edit features for the IMG width... :)

Sorry to say but it makes no sense (I know you did not write it). It clearly shows some logic thought before they changed the template layout using other CSS.

".ipsColumn_fluid" CSS is the element container in which the post should be placed and where I suspect the bad IMG format comes from. The width is in percentage set at 100% and can be anything in "px" depending on the display width of the page.

First prob, the edits do allow to set the IMG width using "px"units and not percentage and depends on page display ratio on screen.
The first bug here is that they calculate the max width from the default css that they apply at load/rescale page and assume the value represent the naturalWidth in ratio of the element.
Which in practice results to be able to set the width smaller than the "thought" 100% but not bigger to prevent the image to break the layout.

Noble idea and could work if the parent CSS were not making a soup as they do, a proper calculation of current container width based on current display would be accurate and much more robust than trusting CSS rendering to be the yardstick and would not affect the images having an naturalHeight greater than their naturalWidth.

 

 1111606452_Screenshot2020-10-20at12_50_49.thumb.jpg.6a0a0eb9613ed55664014dbf471fe1b4.jpg

As you can see, here, the calc they use to define template precalculated IMG max width allowed are plain wrong, because the CSS applied rescale to max-width before store it for the edits max value assumes an IMG natural width > than naturalHeight and the max-width 100% can never be reached. Probably caused by a parent css of the container. That's why you see in entire forum all the portrait images displayed less wide than the landscape ratio images.
Then the css magic continues, depending on page width during edits, the above done on Iphone landscape. The max being reached when IMG loads, the css then allows the display of a second image, which is then rescaled by its height. The inline code is then, I presumed stored in DB string of the post for the template and while it works ok if viewed on same device again, you can see on the pict above that it fails when viewed on desktop using the properties inline stored originally made for my phone and the media css used at the time of post. Where it's then on my phone displayed with images correctly displayed each one under each other all at 100% width and height in ratio. If I edit the stored px value that was on my phone at edit time by percentage within my browser the problem goes away on my desktop.

Short story: the options for edits should display in "%" with a max 100% vs "px" as they vary and the parent container CSS that forces the portrait images to be displayed smaller should be removed. Then you should be able to have any image loaded displayed using the entire container display width (100% container) by default or smaller if the naturalWidth in ratio is smaller than the display width of the container. And the edit would then work perfectly in ratio across any screen.

As about security for source viewing. I'm asking for the display of the container string only to be able to override this ridiculous pile of CSS misery.
If they fix by real js vs base everything on the results of CSS rendering, there would be no need for raw source edits.

Again Barry, I know it's not your fault!! ;)

 

  

 

Edited by Fabrice

73 modified Grande 351C. Almost done. 

71 429CJ. In progress

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...