Improving TXP Image Management

hakjoon · 2006-03-24 13:37:12

The new wordpress little upload area is pretty nice, but does clicking a link to get to the interface create that much more work? (I’m legitimately asking here, I don’t deal with a ton of images)

I think having the interface permanently open at the bottom is worth considering though. There is space down there.

Bastian · 2006-03-24 13:37:48

something like Bastian’s interface, but permanently open, underneath the text entry box…..

I had not in mind that it should be opened permanent.
For my usage of txp it should open on demand and elsewhere hidden.

Is permanently open an option for james only, or is there anybody else?

jameslomax · 2006-03-24 19:24:10

Bas: there doesn’t seem to be any other serious image users here at the forums. I’ve seen a few txp photo blogs, but those people don’t post here much, if at all.

It does make a difference, if you have to click to open up image management. Think of it like this: would you get fed up, if you had to click a tab to open the text entry box, every time you fired up txp? I think questions of interface design and use-ability are vital for future txp development. The reason why txp image handling is so bad is because design and use-ability were neglected or ignored – but that can change!

It comes down to how much it will be used. If its used 80, 90, 100% of the time, then image handling needs to be open permanently, like the text box, and not hidden away. There’s plenty of white space to make use of to build a clean, simple and efficient interface.

hcgtv · 2006-03-24 20:12:35

James, just wanted to say how nice your photographs are, very impressive.

What are you using to display them?

Bastian · 2006-03-24 22:17:01

@James: How about having an option to show the img wizard thing above the body-textarea.
Make it user’s choice to load it on click or on default.

Is that working for you?

Logoleptic · 2006-03-25 09:04:00

I like users’ choice much better than display-by-default, myself. I’m using this on client sites, most of which are not photo-centric. Having more textareas and form fields on the screen would just confuse things for them.

Personally, I think display-by-default should be relegated to a plugin rather than even being made an option. That’s where features with appeal to a minority of users belong, not in the core.

(prepares for a joke and/or flame about persecuting the minority)

jameslomax · 2006-03-25 18:14:31

Thanks Bert. Don’t understand your question though…my sites are built using txp – is that what you meant?

Bastian wrote:

@James: How about having an option to show the img wizard thing above the body-textarea.
Make it user’s choice to load it on click or on default.
Is that working for you?

Optional would be OK Bas., and probably above the textarea would be better than below.

I really think this should be implemented.

Most people who post at this forum are coders and developers, and it’s time to ‘soften’ and expand the txp design so its more user-friendly – especially for images.

So yes, if it’s an option that would be OK.

squaredeye · 2006-03-26 21:32:17

jameslomax wrote:

I want to emphasise the difference between efficient ‘information management’, and use-ability. Having everything hidden away in the tabs is efficient, and elegant. However, use-ability is a different matter.

Yes, this is true, and I have emphasized this myself before, but there is an issue with the “wordpress” way of thinking here and that is that when one does have hundreds of images, it can be (I foresee it being) unwieldy to place that kind of handling along side (within?) the write tab. I have been “converted” to thinking about image management as many (most?) of the other CMS’ deal with image management – placing it in its own area.

However, I like to think laterally here. You could help me think outside the box Jameslomax by providing alternatives to the wordpress approach which would NOT be unwieldy with large amount of images?

I have often thought that being able to open a popup which acts like a “finder – OSX” or a “Win-Explorer Mcrsft” and lets you navigate to your image and Add attributes to it, and then place it. This is the way that WEB GUI works.

The issue becomes that a design for better image management MUST be expansive and cover the needs of the greatest number of users.

Perhaps the write tab could be tied to the image tab and the two could be loaded simultaneously so that switching between the two was seamless and more like using a tabbed browser?

There’s really no way round this. If this is for serious image management…

I suggest staying as flexible as possible Jameslomax, there is rarely “NO way around” things like this.

:)

Matthew

jameslomax · 2006-03-27 17:59:47

Yes the point about bulk handling within a limited ‘window’ is valid. But it seems to me, it could be done if its well organised – for example, allowing for category and date navigation.

Re. ‘greatest number of users’, that’s also my viewpoint – and also, understanding that most people at these forums are coders and developers, rather than only semi-skilled users. Just above for example, someone writes about doing stuff in txp for clients. Which is not the same thing as end-user requirements.

Re. ‘no way round this’, please see that remark in context: what I’m saying is, the use-ability requirements have to be taken into consideration. My impression is that so far, txp has been a very disciplined project by clever coders. And the result is a lean, mean, and efficient cms that’s great for developers to use building a variety of sites. Thats one thing. Its another thing again, to consider the interface as its used and experienced by the average txp novice.

Anyway, this isn’t really adding anything to the dialogue now…..I’ve made my point, which is that as a novice user I’d like image management to be permanently available without clicking around any tabs to open it up: because its just as important, for me, and for anyone who uses images extensively, as the text area. So by all means make this feature optional, like Bas suggests, but I would urge developers to consider interface use-ability, not just information management.

squaredeye · 2006-03-28 00:11:44

James,
Very well said.
I think the big question here (one of them) is bigger than this thread too, and that is, what is TXP? I had come to TXP hoping it would be a good fit for me since I didn’t care much for wordpress, but just wanted dynamic blogging, and then, woosh, I got swept up in what TXP seems to be at the moment which is a platform for websites with the possibility of blogging rather than the lean machine of WP which is such a “daily” based workstation.

Hmm. Anyway, thanks for adding to the dialogue and keeping me thinking.

Matthew

hakjoon · 2006-03-28 00:49:36

I think James’ post brings up the fact that TXP wears many hats. One thing that might interesting for a core image handling addition might be to try to make it modular enough that plugins could place it anywhere. Afterall in the end it’s just placing divs in different places.

squaredeye · 2006-03-28 00:57:50

Hak,
Well said. I think this would be an ideal method.

M

ps. I look forward to that rose. :)

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#97 2006-03-24 13:37:12

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

#98 2006-03-24 13:37:48

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

#99 2006-03-24 19:24:10

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

#100 2006-03-24 20:12:35

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

#101 2006-03-24 22:17:01

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

#102 2006-03-25 09:04:00

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

#103 2006-03-25 18:14:31

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

#104 2006-03-26 21:32:17

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

#105 2006-03-27 17:59:47

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

#106 2006-03-28 00:11:44

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

#107 2006-03-28 00:49:36

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

#108 2006-03-28 00:57:50

Re: Improving TXP Image Management

Board footer