Textpattern CMS support forum
You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: upm_img_popper
starzabove: you can wrap the plugin tags with an HTML hyperlink and that will work.
mary: the check box and radio buttons sound good. As for customizing the caption, how would you handle it? Using a class and user assigned CSS, or some other way?
I’m also having a problem with the way the plugin outputs HTML. Physical example here.
On my site, horizontally aligned images are 600 pixels wide by 400 pixels high, with a few exceptions where I’ve cropped photos to different dimensions. My article area is only 400 pixels wide. When I include photos in my articles (which I do often as a photoblogger) I assign them a class that resizes them to 400 pixels wide. The browser then adjusts the height automatically to match proportionate dimensions.
The problem is that your plugin specifies width and height dimensions in the code, overriding my class instructions and resulting in a distorted image. On the link above, the first two images have class assignments and are messed up. The bottom two do not have a class assignment, look fine, but over run my content area.
I suppose all this is a long way of saying: Could you change the way the code outputs so that there are not width and height instructions in the HTML? These tags have always seemed extraneous anyway, as images will output at 100% of their dimensions by default, without them. Including them only messes up CSS adjustments as in the example above.
And I have a client site that I would love to include this plugin on (once captions are implemented), but this would be a major problem for them too as they use a series of classes to display the same images at various sizes throughout the site.
What do you think?
Last edited by theturninggate (2005-05-28 14:40:41)
Offline
#86 2005-05-28 14:45:27
- Mary
- Sock Enthusiast
- Registered: 2004-06-27
- Posts: 6,236
Re: upm_img_popper
“…or some other way”?
Other way – allow you to decide the markup itself, so you could wrap it in a paragraph or div or…
“…but does not seem to be changing the height automatically”
That’s because the tag generates the width and height attribute. There’s no way I can alter the height dynamically, but I could allow you to stop the tag from generating width and/or height.
Offline
Re: upm_img_popper
That would be awesome! :)
Offline
Re: upm_img_popper
I had the same problem as well so that would be a nice feature to be able to choose.
@MARY said:
Basically, the check boxes, as you said. One checkbox, two radio buttons.
• one checkbox for the image alt.
• the two radios for the choice of either returning it as a title, or returning it to be used as a caption (like your example).
Then what I can do is create a little preference for it, where you can customize how the caption gets spit out, as in the html around it, if you do use the caption option.
That sound fantastic. A good way to really have everyting there if you want it/need it or not there if you don’t.
Last edited by soulship (2005-05-28 15:46:15)
Offline
#89 2005-05-28 20:47:52
- Mary
- Sock Enthusiast
- Registered: 2004-06-27
- Posts: 6,236
Re: upm_img_popper
I’ve changed my mind about the implementation a bit – the three choices shall be
• Display alternate text?
• Display title?
• Display custom?
The third choice would completely over-rule the first two. Involves forms. Much easier for everyone to do this from the start, than to try and dance around it until it gets rediculous.
Offline
Re: upm_img_popper
> mary wrote:
> I’ve changed my mind about the implementation a bit – the three choices shall be
• Display alternate text?
• Display title?
• Display custom?
The third choice would completely over-rule the first two. Involves forms. Much easier for everyone to do this from the start, than to try and dance around it until it gets rediculous.
Is this going to affect the way the images deal with this info at present? I’m personally happy with the way they’re managed, so would these options overide the existing setup?
Offline
#91 2005-05-28 22:34:41
- Mary
- Sock Enthusiast
- Registered: 2004-06-27
- Posts: 6,236
Re: upm_img_popper
What do you mean?
Offline
Re: upm_img_popper
sorry I just meant, are these new changes going to make any difference to the way images are handled at present – as in are the default settings for img attributes, and so on going to remain or will the user be required to specifiy this with one of these new options?
Offline
#93 2005-05-28 23:26:03
- Mary
- Sock Enthusiast
- Registered: 2004-06-27
- Posts: 6,236
Re: upm_img_popper
Oh okay. There should be no difference to the end user if they are not making use of the custom feature.
What I’m doing is dropping “custom” as a type, and allowing full (but optional) customization via some tags and a form, rather than just allowing you to hand it your own JavaScript function.
The other four types (image, article, thumb, or popup) remain the same, with the same optional id, class, etc
I’m trying to find a nice balance of easy to use, and easy to customize.
You may decide to make use of this custom function, once you see how it works – once setup, transparent to the user, but a LOT more possibilities.
And of course, if I make a release and everyone says “hey you made it crap!”, then I’d try and make it much better.
I’m going to do a few more checks, then release it a few minutes – my own small testing isn’t likely to find all the bugs.
Offline
Re: upm_img_popper
Another option for setting the thing up would be to create an entry for the plugin in the “Extensions” tab and allow the user to set various attributes there.
Offline
#95 2005-05-29 22:17:37
- rajo
- Member
- Registered: 2004-03-13
- Posts: 43
Re: upm_img_popper
Would it be possiblt to add the ability to have automatic insertion into the custom fields of a post?
Offline
#96 2005-05-29 22:36:00
- Mary
- Sock Enthusiast
- Registered: 2004-06-27
- Posts: 6,236
Re: upm_img_popper
I’d have to say no: there are up to 10 custom fields (and maybe one day they’ll be unlimited); there is isn’t a way to do it that wouldn’t bloat the plugin, which I’m trying to keep as concise as possible. Depending on the usage, that’s really suited to another plugin.
Offline