responses, questions, ideas
parent
34c72f2162
commit
786dcf15c4
|
@ -76,6 +76,12 @@ code or tried it yet, but here goes. --[[Joey]]
|
|||
> though (although they don't necessarily have to be full wikilinks).
|
||||
> -s
|
||||
|
||||
>> I think that with the new dependency types system, the dependencies for
|
||||
>> these can be presence dependencies, which will probably help with
|
||||
>> avoiding rebuilds of a page if the next/prev page is changed.
|
||||
>> (Unless you use img to make the thumbnails for those links, then it
|
||||
>> would rebuild the thumbnails anyway. Have not looked at the code.) --[[Joey]]
|
||||
|
||||
* And doesn't each viewer page really depend on every other page in the
|
||||
same albumsection? If a new page is added, the next/prev links
|
||||
may need to be updated, for example. If so, there will be much
|
||||
|
@ -97,6 +103,11 @@ code or tried it yet, but here goes. --[[Joey]]
|
|||
>
|
||||
> (This stalled my attempt at a trail plugin, too.) -s
|
||||
|
||||
>> Not sure I understand why these need to look at pagespecs at scan time?
|
||||
>> Also, note that it is fairly doable to detect if a pagespec uses such
|
||||
>> metadata. Er, I mean, I have a cheezy hack in `add_depends` now that does
|
||||
>> it to deal with a similar case. --[[Joey]]
|
||||
|
||||
* One thing I do like about having individual pages per image is
|
||||
that they can each have their own comments, etc.
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -131,6 +142,15 @@ code or tried it yet, but here goes. --[[Joey]]
|
|||
> page, so you can batch-edit the whole lot by editing one file (this
|
||||
> does mean that editing the album necessarily causes each of its viewers
|
||||
> to be rebuilt, but in practice that happens anyway). -s
|
||||
>
|
||||
>> Yes, that would make some sense.. It also allows putting one image in
|
||||
>> two albums, with different caption etc. (Maybe for different audiences.)
|
||||
>>
|
||||
>> It would probably be possible to add a new dependency type, and thus
|
||||
>> make ikiwiki smart about noticing whether the metadata has actually
|
||||
>> changed, and only update those viewers where it has. But the dependency
|
||||
>> type stuff is still very new, and not plugin friendly .. so only just
|
||||
>> possible, --[[Joey]]
|
||||
|
||||
----
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -140,6 +160,10 @@ Suppose that each viewer is a JPEG-or-GIF-or-something, with extension
|
|||
".albumimage". We have a gallery "memes" with three images, badger,
|
||||
mushroom and snake.
|
||||
|
||||
> An alternative might be to use ".album.jpg", and ".album.gif"
|
||||
> etc as the htmlize extensions. May need some fixes to ikiwiki to support
|
||||
> that. --[[Joey]]
|
||||
|
||||
Files in git repo:
|
||||
|
||||
* index.mdwn
|
||||
|
@ -172,6 +196,10 @@ To not confuse other plugins, album should probably have a filter() hook
|
|||
that turns .albumimage files into HTML? That'd probably be a reasonable
|
||||
way to get them rendered anyway.
|
||||
|
||||
> I guess that is needed to avoid preprocess, scan, etc trying to process
|
||||
> the image, as well as eg, smiley trying to munge it in sanitize.
|
||||
> --[[Joey]]
|
||||
|
||||
do=edit&page=memes/badger needs to not put the JPG in a text box: somehow
|
||||
divert or override the normal edit CGI by telling it that .albumimage
|
||||
files are not editable in the usual way?
|
||||
|
@ -182,7 +210,14 @@ the overly strict constraint that the ordered sequence of pages in each
|
|||
album must be known at scan time. However, that's not *necessarily* needed:
|
||||
the album and each photo could collect an unordered superset of dependencies
|
||||
at scan time, and at rebuild time that could be refined to be the exact set,
|
||||
in order. Perhaps restricting to "the images in an album A must match A/*"
|
||||
in order.
|
||||
|
||||
> Why do you need to collect this info at scan time? You can determine it
|
||||
> at build time via `pagespec_match_list`, surely .. maybe with some
|
||||
> memoization to avoid each image in an album building the same list.
|
||||
> I sense that I may be missing a subtelty though. --[[Joey]]
|
||||
|
||||
Perhaps restricting to "the images in an album A must match A/*"
|
||||
would be useful; then the unordered superset could just be "A/*". Your
|
||||
"albums via tags" idea would be nice too though, particularly for feature
|
||||
parity with e.g. Facebook: "photos of Joey" -> "tags/joey and albumimage()"
|
||||
|
@ -195,12 +230,20 @@ and it could get quite hard to navigate. Perhaps next/previous links could
|
|||
be displayed only for the closest ancestor (in URL space) that is an
|
||||
album, or something?
|
||||
|
||||
> Ugh, yeah, that is a problem. Perhaps wanting to support that was just
|
||||
> too ambitious. --[[Joey]]
|
||||
|
||||
Requiring renaming is awkward for non-technical Windows/Mac users, with both
|
||||
platforms' defaults being to hide extensions; however, this could be
|
||||
circumvented by adding some sort of hook in attachment to turn things into
|
||||
a .albumimage at upload time, and declaring that using git/svn/... without
|
||||
extensions visible is a "don't do that then" situation :-)
|
||||
|
||||
> Or extend `pagetype` so it can do the necessary matching without
|
||||
> renaming. Maybe by allowing a subdirectory to be specified along
|
||||
> with an extension. (Or allow specifying a full pagespec,
|
||||
> but I hesitate to seriously suggest that.) --[[Joey]]
|
||||
|
||||
Ideally attachment could also be configured to upload into a specified
|
||||
underlay, so that photos don't have to be in your source-code control
|
||||
(you might want that, but I don't!).
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue