Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 11 votes

Still no way to easily create navigation tabs


  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#41 Chito

Chito

    Advanced Member

  • Visitors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 330 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 12:13 AM

People shouldn't have to have a "strong argument" to suggest a feature. We all pay for Invision products, so we're all entitled to our own opinions. If you don't think that a navigation system needs to be added—great. Obviously, a lot of others (myself included) do, so there's no reason you should discredit them for that opinion.

I think that a navigation management system is crucial, for all of the reasons pointed out above. I've spent hours trying to add links and have them display as active on the pages they are active on. It's not simple. Though YOU may not use a nav management system, I certainly will, and I'm sure others will also.


What Kyle said ^^
  • ♥ Adam ♠ likes this

#42 Ikadon

Ikadon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:01 AM


IPB is not a cms, you are comparing different things. IP Content is a cms. IPB Forum is a forum software not a cms



If you had actually read my whole posts you would have seen that I stated this myself. I want my users to have a common look and feel through all applications. I don't care if this is included in IP.Content or IP.Board, I just would love to see it happen. Apart from that I didn't want to make a new thread (as there have been numerous of those about a flexible-ACP-solution for navigation-editing)
  • IPB Bob and ♥ Adam ♠ like this

#43 Ikadon

Ikadon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:03 AM


The difference is not just semantic and we're NOT talking about the suite but about the Forums part only...focus people.


No, you are alone talking about the forums only. There are many things in the core that need to be in the core for some reason. Apart from that, I still don't care if this is implemented into IP.Board or IP.Content, I just want to be able to use it across all the different applications.
  • IPB Bob, TheArchon, Tanax and 1 other like this

#44 bonesoul

bonesoul

    IPB Full Member

  • +Clients
  • 160 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:27 AM

+1 to mod, we need easy modification support for navigation items.
  • ♥ Adam ♠ likes this

#45 Christophe

Christophe

    Spam Happy

  • +Clients
  • 855 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 02:18 PM

It is not about having "strong arguments" it is about understanding that in a dev house you have to have priorities because your time is limited.
In order to find 'what is needed' and 'what would be nice' you have people who make decisions based on their knowledge and experience of issues.

Ultimately ALL suggestions are good and ALL suggestions should be implemented when you think about it since they improve things. If that was the case, apps would never see the light of day. Let me try to explain this in another way.

When you are in a dev situation you have to think further than simply the creation of the feature. You must also think forward ie does this addition to the code create potential problems and what could they be? My GF is a wow dev. For years of following what she does I learned that even the single change can have massive repercussions that coders never think about at first. With all this said when I hear about a 'feature' to add my first reaction is always: How can this break things?

And this question applies here. How would having a menu editor possibly break things?

Well in that case you are faced with two types of people: Coders who know what they are doing and those who would use the menu editor.
The ones who know what they are doing would develop on a test server and add their own menu code and what they would add would be what they need and nothing else. The changes they would make could be reverted easily. Then on the other end you have people who would only use the menu manager. They would be able to reorder tabs and add as amny as they would want and that is where things can break as most of these people would probably do changes on their live board. That is why I was giving the example of someone adding tons of other menus like Contact Us - About Us - Advertize - Promotions - Donate - Services etc... You can see this quickly growing with a lot of tabs.

As soon as this is enabled, the same people will ask for drop downs instead of tabs as the number of tabs will only keep on growing. Now from a small number of tabs you have transitioned to a lot of drop downs. The original purpose of the navigation is now gone, there are so many options that you need to mouseover all the drop downs to find what you are looking for so you ask for the drop downs to be replaced with a mega-menu etc... and it keeps changing, growing and be prone to errors and breaking the skin. I have seen it happen countless of times with the many projects I have been part of. Anyway, in the end, I support the idea to have an easier way to manage menus but I know that for IPB this will open the door to more support questions and ultimately more work as opposed to locking all admins with a basic template/functionality that can be improved with small changes to the header or custom skins.

Think about it this way...if you want IPB to make a menu editor like a Wordpress menu editor then why not also ask them to do a menu editor for the Black bar on top of the screen? why not also a breadcrumb editor? Again I am not trying to be confrontational but to provide argumentation to the issue. I do not care one way or the other as IPB decides what is best for them, I am only trying to further the discussions by providing example and hopefully making you see further then simply 'adding a feature we want'

#46 MageLeif

MageLeif

    Advanced Member

  • +Clients
  • 206 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 07:07 PM

Your argument is illogical, Christophe. You're saying that since the feature could be abused by adding too many menus, it shouldn't be added at all. That brand-new Visual Skin Editor will no doubt produce some hideous skins, but is that the fault of the developers? No, it's the fault of the site owners who decided they wanted cyan text on a neon green background. It's still a great feature, even though not everyone will use it as intended.

Moreover, I don't understand your "time is limited" argument. Invision sets deadlines for itself, so really, they have all the time they want. (I believe there was a discussion awhile back of people wanting to change IPS's slogan to "when it's ready".) Their only true goal is to stay ahead of their competition, and quite frankly, they're way ahead of that game. So I'm positive that if the developers thought that a navigation management system would be put to good use, they'd spend the time adding one.
  • IPB Bob, TheArchon, Tanax and 6 others like this

#47 Christophe

Christophe

    Spam Happy

  • +Clients
  • 855 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 08:56 PM

With all due respect look and feel has nothing to do with the issue we are discussing.

ISSUE: Some people want a menu editor because it would make their customizations easier to do.

I argued that there is no need for one as you may make changes yourself and that providing one would open the door to broken navigations and would need to be updated to increase the number of options it provides increasing the potential number of things that can break. As far as the css editor is concerned, you can only make changes the css look and feel with it ie not break the page/navigation unless you go directly in the code. The fact that some changes may look ugly is not the same thing as having a navigation that now is on two lines instead of one.

In order to deal with potential two lines navigations you would need the code to dynamically be able to recognize that the skin is fixed and calculate the length of the menus and find that it is wrapping on two lines and instead provide a More > drop down menu with all the other tabs you would like to have in it...but then again as I mentioned this opens the door to more issues.It would also solve the two lines issue with forcing a limited number of tabs...again opening more issues than solving.

Adding even 5 tabs would break the navigation in fixed width layouts that have many hooks.

Quote: So I'm positive that if the developers thought that a navigation management system would be put to good use, they'd spend the time adding one.
Exactly and since this has not been done yet seem to say that IPB doesn t think its warranted.

#48 HellaWicked

HellaWicked

    Chronic Lakerholic

  • +Clients
  • 567 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 09:21 PM

I too would have to agree with what Kyle is trying to say. Christophe, you don't notice a pattern here in this thread? People are 'Liking' what Kyle and others are saying, yet I don't see any 'likes' on your replies. Why? Because the majority of us agree on his point of views. You keep writing all these long posts, but basically are repeating the same thing over and over again. At some point I stopped reading your replies because one, as I mentioned, you keep repeating your point that nobody agrees with. And two, quite frankly, I get bored of reading posts that long. You keep trying to make your argument as if everyone who will use this feature will be stupid enough to abuse it and put countless tabs and thus create "broken" navigations. First of all, you don't know that as a fact. Why not them try it out and see if it does "break" the navigation or create some disastrous results as you keep trying to point out. If an actual IPS developer can reply in this thread to verify what you're saying is true, then perhaps I'll believe it. Until that happens, I'm going to continue to support this suggestion.
  • IPB Bob, TheArchon, Tanax and 3 others like this

#49 MageLeif

MageLeif

    Advanced Member

  • +Clients
  • 206 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 10:20 PM

With all due respect look and feel has nothing to do with the issue we are discussing.

I wasn't saying that the Visual Skin Editor had anything to do with the current suggestion—I was just using it as an example to point out your logical fallacy.

Quite honestly, I've said everything about this feature that I want to say. Not to oversimplify, but I see our debate a little like this:

You're arguing that this thread's suggestion shouldn't be considered because
  • It isn't necessary
  • It would be difficult to implement, and
  • People could abuse it.
I'm arguing that
  • Many IPS features aren't "necessary", but they improve the product
  • You shouldn't be concerned with how difficult it is to implement; that's a problem to be solved by the developers, not by you, and
  • Many IPS features can be abused (HTML editing, anyone?), so again, this is a non-issue.
And considering that you wouldn't have to use this feature even if it WAS implemented, it's rather pointless to continue arguing against it.
  • IPB Bob, Tanax, Ditchmonkey and 2 others like this

#50 Christophe

Christophe

    Spam Happy

  • +Clients
  • 855 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 10:24 PM

Yes there is no point keeping on arguing on this. It was not my intent to drag it.

Personally I don t care one way or another. If IPB believes it is warranted to add a menu manager they will add one and I will be happy with it.
I only provide comments to entertain the discussion not to win an argument.
  • Tom Christian likes this

#51 Ikadon

Ikadon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 03:46 AM

So I'm positive that if the developers thought that a navigation management system would be put to good use, they'd spend the time adding one.


One possible argument. The users at my local vBulletin-forums have been crying for the ability to change and administrate the navigation bar since months and even years. IPS could be the first to provide this :) (regarding community software from one hand only)
  • ♥ Adam ♠ likes this

#52 Ikadon

Ikadon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 03:49 AM

I argued that there is no need for one as you may make changes yourself and that providing one would open the door to broken navigations and would need to be updated to increase the number of options it provides increasing the potential number of things that can break.


With this (pseudo-)"argument" one could literally neglect every suggestion on these boards. "You want facebook-connect? Just add it yourself! You can't code? Well, then hire someone." You could spin this for every single feature.
  • IPB Bob, TheArchon, ♥ Adam ♠ and 1 other like this

#53 qscott86

qscott86

    IPB Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 96 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 05:53 PM

The problem is that he keeps ignoring the fact that you shouldn't have to manipulate code to add navigation links. By Christphe's standards, then we should change the code each time we want to add a forum. As I've stated numerous times, it should be just as intuitive as adding a new forum. Why should adding a link require one to change the board's code?
  • IPB Bob, TheArchon, Ikadon and 3 others like this

#54 Tanax

Tanax

    Advanced Member

  • Visitors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 437 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 06:27 PM

The problem is that he keeps ignoring the fact that you shouldn't have to manipulate code to add navigation links. By Christphe's standards, then we should change the code each time we want to add a forum. As I've stated numerous times, it should be just as intuitive as adding a new forum. Why should adding a link require one to change the board's code?


Because you could abuse it and add 5000 forums and make the page exceed the browser's memory capacity, making it overload and crash the computer..
  • Ikadon likes this

#55 Marcher Technologies

Marcher Technologies

    $life=FALSE;$code=TRUE;$time--;

  • +Clients
  • 11,695 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 07:20 PM

I too would have to agree with what Kyle is trying to say. Christophe, you don't notice a pattern here in this thread? People are 'Liking' what Kyle and others are saying, yet I don't see any 'likes' on your replies. Why? Because the majority of us agree on his point of views. You keep writing all these long posts, but basically are repeating the same thing over and over again. At some point I stopped reading your replies because one, as I mentioned, you keep repeating your point that nobody agrees with. And two, quite frankly, I get bored of reading posts that long. You keep trying to make your argument as if everyone who will use this feature will be stupid enough to abuse it and put countless tabs and thus create "broken" navigations. First of all, you don't know that as a fact. Why not them try it out and see if it does "break" the navigation or create some disastrous results as you keep trying to point out. If an actual IPS developer can reply in this thread to verify what you're saying is true, then perhaps I'll believe it. Until that happens, I'm going to continue to support this suggestion.


.... I can say from having built many a website with ipcontent... YES... fact is.. most skin designers simply wont take the time to wrap navigation tabs... not even IPS default skin does this... and MANY MANY have added too many and incurred broken layouts.

#56 Chito

Chito

    Advanced Member

  • Visitors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 330 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 07:45 PM


.... I can say from having built many a website with ipcontent... YES... fact is.. most skin designers simply wont take the time to wrap navigation tabs... not even IPS default skin does this... and MANY MANY have added too many and incurred broken layouts.


Still doesn't mean everyone will do it. There are many, many forums/sites out there using IP.Board that have nicely organized navigation tabs with no problems whatsoever. Don't punish the well-organized, good designers along with the bad. And why so worried? If you don't wish to implement this feature (if they do decide to add it), you don't have to. If others wish to be sloppy and have their boards look like crap, that's on them, not on you or your board.
  • IPB Bob, Ikadon, ♥ Adam ♠ and 1 other like this

#57 Marcher Technologies

Marcher Technologies

    $life=FALSE;$code=TRUE;$time--;

  • +Clients
  • 11,695 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 07:47 PM


Still doesn't mean everyone will do it. There are many, many forums/sites out there using IP.Board that have nicely organized navigation tabs with no problems whatsoever. Don't punish the well-organized, good designers along with the bad. And why so worried? If you don't wish to implement this feature (if they do decide to add it), you don't have to. If others wish to be sloppy and have their boards look like crap, that's on them, not on you or your board.


Never said i was against this feature at all... just providing a counterpoint from experience.

#58 openfire

openfire

    Advanced Member

  • +Clients
  • 342 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 11:11 PM

+1 for an option to add extra navigation tabs!
  • IPB Bob and ♥ Adam ♠ like this

#59 ♥ Adam ♠

♥ Adam ♠

    Advanced Member

  • Previous Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 391 posts

Posted 23 June 2011 - 12:02 AM

+1 on this ideal
  • IPB Bob likes this

Say, No... To Censorship

Find Us on Facebook!
Follow Us on Twitter!

Ron Paul for President 2012

THINK: Things to do before Upgrading or tweaking

  • Backup your database 3X
  • Backup your files
  • Try on your TEST site 1st

#60 Calumks

Calumks

    IPB Newbie

  • Visitors
  • Pip
  • 48 posts

Posted 24 June 2011 - 01:56 PM

Please add this!
Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users