smd_slimbox

the_ghost · 2008-01-23 21:24:10

Some notices – I use Opera 9.2+ and this happens on every “slimboxed” image at page. It doesn’t launchs slimbox effects at all – it produces error on the first click. Next time i will see it I’ll pose here!

hew! I found – http://www.digitalia.be/software/slimbox – Opera makes error, Firefox closes, IE7 works :)
When i click at bill gates i get this. url in new page and this image openes at the parent page

Last edited by the_ghost (2008-01-23 21:32:07)

jstubbs · 2008-01-23 21:24:16

Hi Stef. Wondering how the testing of your alpha version is going? Using thickbox. What are your current plans for that?

Bloke · 2008-01-23 21:33:22

@the_ghost: Thanks, I’ve got Opera 9.25 here. I must admit I don’t often test in that browser, but I’ll take a look at some slimbox output and see if I can replicate what you see.

@jstubbs: I restarted work on the next iteration of slimbox at the weekend and hit the jackpot I think. I don’t foresee any more hurdles (ha! famous last words) so when I’ve checked all the options do what they say on the tin, I’ll tidy up the code a bit and let it out as a “testing” release at first, like I did with smd_fuzzy_find.

Be forewarned that it’s a huge departure from slimbox and, in fact, is no longer called smd_slimbox :-)

Watch the plugin development forum!

Bloke · 2008-01-23 21:55:54

the_ghost wrote:

http://www.digitalia.be/software/slimbox – Opera makes error, Firefox closes, IE7 works :) When i click at bill gates

Woah, freaky! Looks like somehow it’s messing something up and concatenating the URL and the title into one long string, then trying to reference that as an image. On my machine here it works fine in Firefox 2.0.0.11 , Opera 9.25 and IE6 :-\

Assuming the HTML of that image on the page looks ok to you (does the link and image HTML look “normal”?), I wonder if it’s something to do with the character set you are using? Perhaps there are some “strange” quoting rules that your browser language employs which intercepts/confuses the mootools calls that search for rel=“lightbox-” on the page?

As it looks like it’s more to do with Christophe’s slimbox.js than my thumbnail generation, could I ask you to show him those two links (or point him to your question in this thread) so he can see what you see, and ask if he has any ideas why it could be happening on your browser?

Thanks.

the_ghost · 2008-01-23 22:47:13

I’m really confused :) If this is my browsers error, it’s really strange :)
But i like Thickbox more :) One of reasons – it uses jQuery wich is loaded on my site :)

Bloke · 2008-01-23 22:53:36

the_ghost wrote:

I’m really confused :) If this is my browsers error, it’s really strange :)

Yes it is odd. I cannot replicate it on my browsers at all. I wonder if anyone else has ever seen this? Anyone?!

But i like Thickbox more :) One of reasons – it uses jQuery wich is loaded on my site :)

Yeah. Although Thickbox isn’t quite as “polished” to look at (well, last time I looked at least) but it’s got some very cool features. And as you say, it’s jQuery which means no/very few extra libraries since jQuery is now distributed with TXP. That’s my primary motivation behind the next plugin that will replace slimbox. And maybe others ;-)

the_ghost · 2008-01-23 23:00:14

I’m waiting an invitation to youк smd_thickbox plugin development thread :)
P.S. Another cool feature of thickbox is div’s pop-ups

marios · 2008-01-24 02:44:51

Bloke wrote:

marios wrote:

I’ve got some extra text in the caption field. That is supposed to show only on the slim_box popup, not underneath.

When you say “not underneath”, do you mean not in the bit of the lightbox that rolls down and says “Image 1 of N”? i.e. do you want the span to “float” over the lightboxed image? (btw I can’t find a way of making the plugin do that!)

However, I can almost generate the code you mention with this cheating tag:

<txp:smd_slimbox category="whatever" wraptag="div" cellclass="smd" thumbtextwrap=""
thumbtext="after: &lt;span class='getridofme'&gt;Some extra text&lt;/span&gt;" />

@bloke, got it:

I was just using this wrong, so listen, this is what I must do:

<txp:smd_slimbox imageid=“40” limit=“1” showalt=“0” />

(To get rid of the span tag)

Now, regarding the anchor tags, I’ve hacked it in yours, (Quick ugly fix)
On line 37 I added the class variable as arr-member:

	$aclass = isset($aclass) ? $aclass:"smd";

and replaced line 480 with this:

$outStr .= '<a class=".'$aclass'." href="'.$full.'" rel="lightbox-' .$grp. '" title="' .implode(" ", $captionArray). '">' .(($textpos == "before") ? $capStr : ''). '<img src="' .$theThumb. '" alt="' .$row['alt']. '"' . (($imgclass != "") ? ' class="' .$imgclass. '"' : '') . (($thumbWidth) ? ' width="' . $thumbWidth.$thumbWUnits. '"' : '') . (($thumbHeight) ? ' height="' . $thumbHeight.$thumbHUnits. '"' : '') . ' />' .(($textpos == "after") ? $capStr : ''). '</a>'.n;

Now, with my class rule by default I get a float, and if I don’t want a float, I change the class attribute in the slimbox tag.

Works now, but if you just want to add this option in ?

regards, marios

Joey · 2008-01-24 09:23:06

Bloke wrote:

Yeah. Although Thickbox isn’t quite as “polished” to look at (well, last time I looked at least) but it’s got some very cool features.

The main difference between slimbox and thickbox is that thickbox doesn’t have the ‘fade-in’ animation:

Due to the ThickBox creator’s view that transitions should be tailored by individual authors, ThickBox windows do not implement fancy transitions. Feel free to add them as you see fit. Is this a feature? Well, some might say it is.

And of course it hasn’t the nice next and previous buttons as slimbox (only small textlinks under the title, but I think you can change this pretty easily with css).

But I would love to see a plugin for thickbox, because — as you said yourself- – jquery is now in textpattern, and I also use jquery for my other javascript things on websites :)

Last edited by Joey (2008-01-24 09:24:05)

Bloke · 2008-01-24 21:26:59

Glad you got it working marios, sorry if it seems I was being dim.

marios wrote:

regarding the anchor tags, I’ve hacked it in yours, (Quick ugly fix)… $aclass = isset($aclass) ? $aclass:“smd”;

OK, cool.

Works now, but if you just want to add this option in ?

I may do, but I think I’ll do what I probably should have done in the first place. That is, if you specify cellclass AND wraptag, the wraptag takes the class. If you specify cellclass with NO wraptag, the anchor gets the class instead (at the moment the cellclass is ignored if you omit wraptag, which is clearly stupid of the plugin!)

Doing it that way saves an option and I notice that some TXP tags/plugins do it this way by default so I should be doing it that way too.

Thanks for the pointer :-)

Bloke · 2008-01-24 21:52:06

Joey wrote:

The main difference between slimbox and thickbox is that thickbox doesn’t have the ‘fade-in’ animation:

Yeah, I read that in the docs too, though it’s not the animation I was referring to when I said it wasn’t “polished”. In fact I think I prefer the Thickbox way without transitions — although it can be disconcerting for new users who might prefer the animation to make it obvious what is going on when they click a thumb (I’d guess that most web users have seen a lightbox style effect by now so it’s not so much an issue any more). Plus, the animation can become tiring very quickly and is also not very well respected in the pro photography arena.

It’s difficult to explain but the last time I tried Thickbox it just seemed “clunky”; I don’t know if that makes sense. Like at any moment it’d stop working or not render the picture (which it obviously will because it’s an excellent piece of software). Y’know how you feel when you double click an install.exe nowadays under XP and it opens up a Windows 98-style installer? You know it’ll work but it just feels odd. Rightly or wrongly, that was how I felt with Thickbox. I think maybe it was partly because it didn’t seem to respond to keyboard shortcuts and I really like that in Slimbox (I’m a keyboard geek). Mind you, Moonbox doesn’t either at the moment so I hacked it to accept them in my version.

Now I haven’t looked at Thickbox in ages so that may well have all changed. What I love about it is that it uses jQuery and it can render all manner of other stuff like HTML and fancy markup very easily. Seriously cool.

With all the libraries and effects out there, giving you a means of getting all manner of TXP thumbnails and allowing any js library (now and in future) to work with them is where I’m heading with the next version. It’s working well on my test site. Got some kinks to iron out, the option names to finalise and a few “niceties” to build in, but if I get some time to do that I expect it’ll be out for preview within the next couple of weeks. Then I’ll take everyone’s criticism on board and make it work properly for the official plugin release :-)

jelle · 2008-01-24 23:52:23

Bloke wrote:
It’s difficult to explain but the last time I tried Thickbox it just seemed “clunky”; I don’t know if that makes sense. Y’know how you feel when you double click an install.exe nowadays under XP and it opens up a Windows 98-style installer?

Wow, I’ve been checking out all WHATEVER-box solutions (lightwindow, litebox, smoothbox, thickbox etc. etc.) around these past 2 days. I’m trying to find one that fits my needs, preferably a jQuery solution for the obvious reasons. I got this feeling with Thickbox I couldn’t quite put into words. Your discription right there though…..thats is exactly why Thickbox doesn’t “feel” right. I’m wondering if it has to do with animations and fading.

Bloke wrote:
With all the libraries and effects out there, giving you a means of getting all manner of TXP thumbnails and allowing any js library (now and in future) to work with them is where I’m heading with the next version.

Ooooh…looking forward to that. I really like this plugin. Not just the slimbox stuff but, the actual plugin features….the best gallery solution for txp I’ve found.

Last edited by jelle (2008-01-25 07:22:15)

Joey · 2008-01-25 08:20:38

I also totally agree with you Bloke. I also have that weird feeling. However, it is not exactl easy to point out why I have that feeling. It is actually a neat plugin ;-)

Looking forward to the new plugin :)

vixcurse · 2008-01-26 07:52:07

Just thought I’d post to let everyone know, after hard-coding everything into the page (img tags etc) and everything, I used a static- non textpattern page to test.

After hours of testing every tag on my page, turns out in one of the menu mouseovers, naming the “Links” button with id=“links” was somehow conflicting with something. After removing that tag (it MAY have been id or name, i removed both once i traced it down to that img tag that was the problem) it works perfect!!

weird. but i’m soooo glad i’ve now got it working! :)

(ok i had no idea i had two usernames here….)

Last edited by vixcurse (2008-01-27 06:14:31)

jelle · 2008-01-27 21:49:21

He guys….just though I let you know about another Lightbox jQuery port: http://code.google.com/p/jquery-lightbox/

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#376 2008-01-23 21:24:10

Re: smd_slimbox

#377 2008-01-23 21:24:16

Re: smd_slimbox

#378 2008-01-23 21:33:22

Re: smd_slimbox

#379 2008-01-23 21:55:54

Re: smd_slimbox

#380 2008-01-23 22:47:13

Re: smd_slimbox

#381 2008-01-23 22:53:36

Re: smd_slimbox

#382 2008-01-23 23:00:14

Re: smd_slimbox

#383 2008-01-24 02:44:51

Re: smd_slimbox

#384 2008-01-24 09:23:06

Re: smd_slimbox

#385 2008-01-24 21:26:59

Re: smd_slimbox

#386 2008-01-24 21:52:06

Re: smd_slimbox

#387 2008-01-24 23:52:23

Re: smd_slimbox

#388 2008-01-25 08:20:38

Re: smd_slimbox

#389 2008-01-26 07:52:07

Re: smd_slimbox

#390 2008-01-27 21:49:21

Re: smd_slimbox

Board footer