16 Dec
2011
16 Dec
'11
8:55 a.m.
2011/12/16 Calvin Morrison <mutantturkey(a)gmail.com>om>:
On 16 December 2011 11:27, E. Liddell <ejlddll(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
It uses disqus for the comments, for which I have mixed feelings. I'd
rather not relay on external services for parts of the website.
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 20:20:11 -0500
Calvin Morrison <mutantturkey(a)gmail.com> wrote:
There is really no reason we should "forget about Konqueror"--it's
sufficiently
modern that it should support CSS1 and at least most of CSS2, and a fair
selection of Javascript constructs. It's possible to create a decent site
within those constraints, keeping in mind that it doesn't have to look
*identical* on both Konqueror and more recent browsers, just "good".
Graceful degredation in webpages is not rocket science.
However, one thing that we do need to keep in mind is that people who
haven't yet installed any other graphical environment may wish to download
Trinity packages--in other words, it would be wise to create something
that is usable in text-based browsers like Lynx (it doesn't have to be
elegant, but it should be possible to get from the root page to the
package
downloads that way).
Depends on what we're trying to achieve. Dynamic pages ease certain
types of collaboration and user-added content, but static pages are not
intrinsically evil and put less of a load on the server.
Both can be good, If anything I'd do a bit of both.
Simple php/html + a commenting system.
here is a good example of very basic and yet has dynamic elements:
http://incise.org/htpicker.html On 15 December 2011 19:45, L0ner sh4dou
<sh4dou(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 2011/12/16 Calvin Morrison <mutantturkey(a)gmail.com>om>:
>
Indeed it looks great and works well, though I think it is very
complicated
> (it is hosted in their git repository so you can see)
>
> I'd like to see some things.
>
> A "planet" - basically it's a feed for all of our different blogs
> into
one
> page.
>
> A "apps" section, I think Darrell spoke about this before.
>
> In fact, Darrell had a lot of good stuff and ideas for simplifying
> the
> navigation of the website, they're somewhere in the mail logs
> recently.
>
> I think we are avoiding using any sort of databsases however and we
> want
to
> make sure tihs all will render well on any web browser.
>
> Calvin Morrison
Well I can do some css magic. It will look good and render on modern
browsers (forget about konqueror tho).
We cannot have our homepage incorrectly load on our own web browser. Not using
databases is a big problem, since it practically constrains
you to use static pages.
Basically - why is is this so bad?