A peer with an expired IPS license just tried to download the file and got a no permission error. Sounds like maybe the version checker script might be in a the wrong category?
I imagine a version checking script for potential adopters was intended to be freely available to all? If that's incorrect and this is intended just for paid-up IPS customers, than I confess to being a bit puzzled?
I really hope that it gets rolled out more universally, and that the mechanism is the same for picking an album cover in IP.G. Totally understand that it can't require IP.G to work, but if IP.G IS installed, I think using IP.G images as covers photos should be a clear option for all uses.
Please let the design encourage synergies between apps.
I really loved the repositioning, nicely done. :-)
IP.C and forum views (other than submit) were conspicuously absent, but I'm guessing they will be delt with in separate entries. IP.C I'm particularly keen to see, but I understand why the examples used were chosen. Can't WAIT to start digging into what we can do with it. :-)
Just this single change would make me deliriously happy with IPS 4.0 even if the rest was totally meh, which it's decidedly NOT.
Seriously, an emphatic thank you and well done to everyone involved, sounds like an ideal solution!
:: snoopy dance ::
Basically what you need to do is to call the fields in the array manually placing them where you want them. If you haven't figured out how to make that work yet, let me know and I'll dig up one of the templates where I did it. It's a LOT more effective for exactly the reason you mentioned. :smile:
Do you mean it's already in the current stable? Or that it's already announced as part of 4.0?
It's certainly possible I've just missed a config option, but going by the notifications here (as an example everyone has access to), if you follow a given Blog Entry about 4.0, clicking the notification that a new comment has been left takes you to the Entry in question at the top of page one, while clicking a notification for a n update to this topic (for instance) jumps you to the last post/reply that you haven't yet read.
Some clarification would be great, and if it's just that I've been looking at something and not seeing it all this time, well, it would be FAR from the first time. ;)
Any chance we can get some info about whether the mark as read functionality from the forums will be rolled out to other apps?
For example, if you click on a notification about replies to a forum topic, you are taken to the the last comment/reply that you have read, which makes following really long multi-page topic easy.
In other apps (IP.Blog etc) when you click on a notification it takes you to the original content, NOT to where you had left off reading the replies/comments.
My guess/assumption is that given the way all the apps are being standardized to use the same functionality, this is something that will BE standard across the entire suite, but knowing if it is or not would have a significant impact on something we may want to talk about with a potential client in the next few days about a future project. I understand if it's something you want to leave for a future blog post, but I'd appreciate knowing the answer if it's something you DO feel comfortable answering. :)
Heh. I worked out the specifics for how to build member blogs into IP.Content using two separate databases, one for the individual "blogs" and a second DB to hold the posts/entries. Decided not to do it, primarily because there is some specialized functionality, and building it as a bespoke IP.C based solution would prevent us from taking advantage of any future updates as well as making importing from an existing system very difficult.
Interesting that we're not the only folks that were looking/thinking about it. Can't wait to see what the IPS team has come up with for IP.Blog in 4.0. :)
The big question is who decides "Where that makes sense" :). For example, is it going to be possible to have gallery image/album discussions in the forum I wonder?
To me it makes a LOT of sense to organize the site on topic focused lines and use the different apps for what they are best at, and the Forums are the app of choice for discussions. So if you post an album of images in the "Kitchens" section of the gallery, I'd GREATLY prefer that discussion about it occurs in the "Kitchens" forum where all the other Kitchen design folks hang out. It brings more discussions into the mix and increases the interaction in the community. Leaving comments/reviews all in the individual app space fragments the community interaction, and buries great discussions in little backwaters of the site where a lot of the core community never see/interact with it.
We LOVE the fact that you can already link IP.Downloads and IP.Content categories to admin specified forums, and we're really hoping that there will be more such flexibility goodness to come in 4.0! Love the frequent blog updates this week... It's the first place I go online every morning!
No, pretty sure he's talking about meta keywords/descriptions. It's in there. :) I agree though that meta keywords and descriptions are pretty much a vestigial at this point.
Personally I think SEO these days is much more about GOOD content first and foremost, clarity in the semantic markup, topic focused pages with excerpts used elsewhere but linking back to the canonical content rather than splitting page weight with duplication, Removing the "noise" from pages that have a really focused topic and url systems that are clear and make sense.
There are niceties emerging in the microformat/RDFa etc areas markup for SEO that have much more compelling implications for me. I love the idea of pulling all commentary OUT of the canonical content for instance, but leaving the link to comments/replies in a micro format/RDFa formatted fashion. So that it's clear that there has been a decent amount of interaction and commentary on a piece of content, and it's over HERE, but this page is the canonical content undiluted by the "noise" of all the commenting. Not always appropriate, but if you're producing good, focused, curated content it could have major impact, IMO of course, YMMV widely like anything else in SEO.
That's what I'd love to see in IP.C 4, the ability to positively control the URL structure (no /_/ or other required delimiter, instead let us define DB specific delimiters, IOW use an admin provided value or similar), better ability to provide field level markup and have the ability to define what categories specific fields are relevant/displayed for. :)
The blogs about IP.C are the ones I'm really waiting for, as the OP points out there is so much to look forward to in the future in, the doors being opened for 3rd party development as much as the official core feature set. :)
Ok, even though I don't agree with your second post, because its the nature of things that the future is uncertain and can only be changed by our decisions and I really would like them to do good rather than hasted ones, I think its much more neutral to read. Thanks for clearing this up.
"Too many": When you call some rational and others "not so rational" thats when it reaches too many, because thats when the insults start. I formyself think that your argument is driven by emotions rather than rational thinking.