Thanks! Will take a look at it tonight :)
On 5 November 2010 15:05, Ethan Jewett <[email protected]> wrote: > Done :-) > > On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Anne Kathrine Petterøe <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > Will you create a new branch? > > Then we could use that to try out new versions of the update box. > > > > > > On 5 November 2010 14:15, Ethan Jewett <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Sounds good to me :-) > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Anne Kathrine Petterøe < > > [email protected] > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > Ok, so did we just decide on the inline feature? (like twitter's) > > > > I would prefer that to streamie's version.. > > > > > > > > And thanks for starting on ESME-302. I will start to work on creating > > > > templates we can work on for a new update box in the meantime. > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5 November 2010 13:37, Richard Hirsch <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Ethan Jewett <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > That is not the consensus that I saw :-) I think Dick was > > advocating > > > > for > > > > > an > > > > > > inline update box like Twitter's, which I think is the same thing > > you > > > > > > preferred. Correct? > > > > > > > > > > Yep. I'd love to use more inline functionality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I'm planning to do right now (for issue ESME-302) is take > the > > > > > current > > > > > > update box and insert it unchanged into the tag and conversation > > > views. > > > > > If > > > > > > we want to change it to make it behave more like Twitter's update > > > box, > > > > > then > > > > > > it will still only involve changing one template. > > > > > > > > > > > > On a related note: I'm starting to think that Lift's templating > > > > mechanism > > > > > is > > > > > > actually pretty nice now that I'm figuring it out! We're going to > > go > > > > from > > > > > 2 > > > > > > -> 1 message template as well! > > > > > > > > > > Sounds great. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ethan > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Anne Kathrine Petterøe > > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> So seems we have settled for the Streamie version of the update > > box? > > > > > Sounds > > > > > >> good to me... > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Do we want to keep the current update box or should we redesign > > it? > > > > Make > > > > > it > > > > > >> smaller maybe? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> /Anne > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On 5 November 2010 10:39, Ethan Jewett <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Me too. I've created a Jira - > > > > > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ESME-302 > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > I'm not going to be able to implement this until this evening > at > > > the > > > > > >> > earliest, but probably later, so if anyone has more ideas, > keep > > > them > > > > > >> > coming. > > > > > >> > Either here or on the Jira issue. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Ethan > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 9:36 AM, Richard Hirsch < > > > > [email protected] > > > > > >> > >wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Ethan Jewett < > > > [email protected]> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Richard Hirsch < > > > > > >> [email protected] > > > > > >> > > >wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> But don't you think moving the update box to the main > > > template > > > > > would > > > > > >> > > >> eat up space? > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > Yes, exactly. This is why I'm proposing changing the > > > form-factor > > > > > of > > > > > >> the > > > > > >> > > > update box when we do this, or going with something > > different > > > > > >> entirely, > > > > > >> > > like > > > > > >> > > > you talk about below. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> I'd like more of an inline update box like that from > > twitter > > > > > rather > > > > > >> > > >> than from seesmic web. > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > I think there is definitely an argument to be made here. > Now > > > > that > > > > > the > > > > > >> > > > templates have been refactored, it would not be difficult > to > > > put > > > > > the > > > > > >> > > update > > > > > >> > > > box inline on the tag and conversation pages. So maybe > that > > is > > > a > > > > > good > > > > > >> > > first > > > > > >> > > > step? > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > The question is - does the behavior change on those pages, > > > > because > > > > > if > > > > > >> > it > > > > > >> > > is > > > > > >> > > > inline I think users will expect to automatically post > with > > a > > > > tag > > > > > or > > > > > >> in > > > > > >> > a > > > > > >> > > > conversation, depending on the context. If we do something > > > more > > > > > like > > > > > >> > > > Streamie or Seesmic (where the update box is clearly part > of > > > the > > > > > >> header > > > > > >> > > and > > > > > >> > > > not the timeline), then it is clear that the update box > > always > > > > > works > > > > > >> > the > > > > > >> > > > same no matter where you are, and if you want to use a tag > > or > > > do > > > > a > > > > > >> > reply > > > > > >> > > > then it is up to you (the user) to do that. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > Like the idea of adding tags automatically or automatically > > > adding > > > > > the > > > > > >> > > message to conversation. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > 1. Have something like Twitter.com's new interface > where > > > > there > > > > > is > > > > > >> > > always > > > > > >> > > >> a > > > > > >> > > >> > small text box displayed and clicking on it expands to > a > > > full > > > > > >> > > >> message-input > > > > > >> > > >> > interface. > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > 2. Have something like streamie.org's interface where > > the > > > > > >> > > message-input > > > > > >> > > >> area > > > > > >> > > >> > slides down from the header upon request (thought I > think > > > if > > > > we > > > > > do > > > > > >> > > this > > > > > >> > > >> we > > > > > >> > > >> > should make it more "in your face" than Streamie's > > > > > >> implementation). > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> Could we "borrow" that CSS code from streamie? > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > Streamie is under a BSD license, so I think the answer is > > yes, > > > > > though > > > > > >> > we > > > > > >> > > > might have to put something in our NOTICE file. Not sure. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > If we decide to go the Streamie route (slide out update > > box), > > > > then > > > > > I > > > > > >> > > think > > > > > >> > > > it will be easier to redo it ourselves. We can use the > > > Streamie > > > > > CSS > > > > > >> and > > > > > >> > > > Javascript as an example, but I think in the end we'll > want > > to > > > > use > > > > > >> > JQuery > > > > > >> > > > animations because they work cross-browser. I'm not sure > > what > > > > Ube > > > > > >> used > > > > > >> > in > > > > > >> > > > Streamie. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > Ethan > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
