What has changed the past 9 years that ...

xexyl

Posts: 157
Registered: 1-Sep-2009

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 27 Jun 20, 22:14

in response to: JeffTucker

Reply

jGromit wrote:

Oh, now you tell me. Where were you ten years ago, when I needed you?

I wasn't here to ask for it. Or I was and didn't think to ask it for you anyway. Who would have thought that me returning would be good? I would say you can bow to me but since you helped me heaps and stacks maybe I ought to be bowing to you. Perhaps we should all be bowing to each other - we can look like a bunch of merry fools leaning over together!

Jest aside this probably really ought to be documented at the very least. And maybe it's an idea to have it specifically in the UI - you know, where when you click on an image you can say I want to exclude this image from this or that filter or filters.

xexyl

Posts: 157
Registered: 1-Sep-2009

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 27 Jun 20, 23:17

in response to: xexyl

Reply

As for the index/slide.htt I just cleaned those up. The index.htt is the one that really needed a clean-up and it's done. I say 'done' but I mean the clean-up I did is done. There probably could be additional things done. I made it HTML5 (I think) and responsive (I think!) and I did the same for slide.htt.

I was able to get rid of a lot of old functions, some loops and probably some other things too.

Thanks again so much. This goes in particular to jGromit but the rest of you too.

Looking at the code examples Rob linked to (thanks - I had seen it but it seems more useful now) there are additional things I can do but those will have to be another time.

Chris you pointed out the widget css. Good point. I probably ought to do that but for now I need a break and probably for a few days at the least. I could realistically submit the update here but I want to test things more (directories and subdirectories seems good though and that was one thing I wasn't sure about) before then. I also have something I want to do with one of the filters but this is all for another day.

I'll let you know if I have any other questions (I can see that being the case).

Cheers and thanks again.

ctwist

Posts: 476
Registered: 27-Sep-2003

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 28 Jun 20, 01:14

in response to: xexyl

Reply

xexyl wrote:
I made it HTML5 (I think)

Feed some album pages into Nu Html Checker. It will identify HTML5 violations.

JeffTucker

Posts: 8,243
Registered: 31-Jan-2006

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 28 Jun 20, 02:22

in response to: ctwist

Reply

I'm surprised at some of the things the validators (the W3 one you've linked to, and Total Validator, which I use) tolerate, but probably shouldn't.

Neither one complains about things like a self-closing break tag:

<br/>

This really should be banished.

And neither complains about the archaic charset (also self-closing):

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
 
Instead of:
 
<meta charset='UTF-8'>

It's a mixed bag when it comes to things that aren't wrong, but should be scrubbed, like the type attributes:

<style type="text/css">body {color: black;}</style>
<script type="text/javascript">var a="asdf";</script>
 
Instead of:
 
<style>body {color: black;}</style>
<script>var a="asdf";</script>

xexyl

Posts: 157
Registered: 1-Sep-2009

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 28 Jun 20, 17:04

in response to: JeffTucker

Reply

jGromit wrote:
I'm surprised at some of the things the validators (the W3 one you've linked to, and Total Validator, which I use) tolerate, but probably shouldn't.

Already gone. When I made the changes yesterday.

Neither one complains about things like a self-closing break tag:

<br/>

This really should be banished.

Same here.

And neither complains about the archaic charset (also self-closing):

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
 
Instead of:
 
<meta charset='UTF-8'>

This was also changed.

It's a mixed bag when it comes to things that aren't wrong, but should be scrubbed, like the type attributes:

<style type="text/css">body {color: black;}</style>
<script type="text/javascript">var a="asdf";</script>
 
Instead of:
 
<style>body {color: black;}</style>
<script>var a="asdf";</script>

Now this is one I didn't know. Mixed bag in what way? Should the type attribute be removed then? Mind that I don't think I have the first but the second one I know I do.

xexyl

Posts: 157
Registered: 1-Sep-2009

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 28 Jun 20, 17:22

in response to: ctwist

Reply

ctwist wrote:

xexyl wrote:
I made it HTML5 (I think)

Feed some album pages into Nu Html Checker. It will identify HTML5 violations.

Good point. After a few fixes here's what I get:

Warning: The type attribute is unnecessary for JavaScript resources.
From line 60, column 1; to line 60, column 31
r"></div>↩<script type="text/javascript"><!--//

However that is from the widget injection which I have no control over. Dave?

And then I also get this:

Warning: Consider adding a lang attribute to the html start tag to declare the language of this document.
From line 1, column 16; to line 2, column 6
TYPE html>↩<html>↩<head
For further guidance, consult Declaring the overall language of a page and Choosing language tags.
If the HTML checker has misidentified the language of this document, please file an issue report or send e-mail to report the problem.

I presume this is from a variable in jAlbum that I am unaware of. I will have a look at it later on unless you know it immediately?

Those were for indexes. For slides it's the same thing (after adding a missing quote in one of the elements).

So this means I have to check with jAlbum variables and then Dave needs to fix the widget injections. Or maybe that is something I have control over?

Ta.

JeffTucker

Posts: 8,243
Registered: 31-Jan-2006

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 28 Jun 20, 17:35

in response to: xexyl

Reply

Yeah, the widget code is a little creaky and could use some updating. That's actually Anders' territory, but he's got a lot on his plate. And it is just a warning, not an error.

The type attributes are a mixed bag in that I can understand why some validators might not flag them as errors, or even give a warning. For <style>, there is no type other than text/css. So that one is completely redundant - it would be like putting a type="image" on an <img> tag - duh.

For the <script> tag, there are technically types other than text/javascript, but they're almost never used. HTML5 assumes that it's text/javascript unless you specify otherwise. So, not wrong, but not needed, either.

JeffTucker

Posts: 8,243
Registered: 31-Jan-2006

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 28 Jun 20, 17:37

in response to: xexyl

Reply

And BTW, "Dave" is an English nickname for "David," but our David is persistently, willfully, and stubbornly Swedish.

xexyl

Posts: 157
Registered: 1-Sep-2009

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 28 Jun 20, 18:24

in response to: JeffTucker

Reply

jGromit wrote:
Yeah, the widget code is a little creaky and could use some updating. That's actually Anders' territory, but he's got a lot on his plate. And it is just a warning, not an error.

I know what that's like!

The type attributes are a mixed bag in that I can understand why some validators might not flag them as errors, or even give a warning. For <style>, there is no type other than text/css. So that one is completely redundant - it would be like putting a type="image" on an <img> tag - duh.

Well what if there's a language where img means something different from image?

But point taken. I've removed it from the templates.

For the <script> tag, there are technically types other than text/javascript, but they're almost never used. HTML5 assumes that it's text/javascript unless you specify otherwise. So, not wrong, but not needed, either.

Right which is why I figured I should include it - that there are other script types. However since the validator flagged it I already removed it.

Thanks for clarifying.

xexyl

Posts: 157
Registered: 1-Sep-2009

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 28 Jun 20, 18:28

in response to: JeffTucker

Reply

jGromit wrote:
And BTW, "Dave" is an English nickname for "David," but our David is persistently, willfully, and stubbornly Swedish.

Yes. For some reason I thought I had read Dave. Or maybe it was because I am knackered.

It might also be because my best mate goes by 'Dave'. That's probably the real thing (well and I am knackered).

As for 'David' and other languages the only other spelling I'm familiar with is in Polish - Dawid. But I've no idea in Swedish though I have some good friends who would be able to tell me how that works as they're also Swedish. It appears to be 'David' though. Besides English and computer languages the only other language I know - and in this case only a bit (i.e. not fluently) - is German.

Thanks for correcting me.

RobM

Posts: 3,808
Registered: 4-Aug-2006

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 28 Jun 20, 18:58

in response to: xexyl

Reply

xexyl wrote:> TYPE html>↩<html>↩<head
For further guidance, consult Declaring the overall language of a page and Choosing language tags.
If the HTML checker has misidentified the language of this document, please file an issue report or send e-mail to report the problem.[/code]

I presume this is from a variable in jAlbum that I am unaware of. I will have a look at it later on unless you know it immediately?

The variable is language

So this means I have to check with jAlbum variables and then Dave needs to fix the widget injections. Or maybe that is something I have control over?

If you really want to have control of the widget code, add ‘autoWidgetInjection=false’ as a property to the skin.properties file. Then add your own widget code where jAlbum’s would have been.

xexyl

Posts: 157
Registered: 1-Sep-2009

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 28 Jun 20, 21:55

in response to: RobM

Reply

RobM wrote:

xexyl wrote:> TYPE html>↩<html>↩<head
For further guidance, consult Declaring the overall language of a page and Choosing language tags.
If the HTML checker has misidentified the language of this document, please file an issue report or send e-mail to report the problem.[/code]

I presume this is from a variable in jAlbum that I am unaware of. I will have a look at it later on unless you know it immediately?

The variable is language

Thanks mate. I actually checked and found it - all is good there.

So this means I have to check with jAlbum variables and then Dave needs to fix the widget injections. Or maybe that is something I have control over?

If you really want to have control of the widget code, add ‘autoWidgetInjection=false’ as a property to the skin.properties file. Then add your own widget code where jAlbum’s would have been.

Ahh right. I knew that that I had seen something like that. I'm not too worried about this though - if it gets fixed it gets fixed but it doesn't bother me for redundancy. (I thought of even removing widgets but something told me that's not a good idea.) Thanks though! Much appreciated.

JeffTucker

Posts: 8,243
Registered: 31-Jan-2006

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 28 Jun 20, 23:28

in response to: xexyl

Reply

xexyl wrote:
I thought of even removing widgets but something told me that's not a good idea.

I don't support them in any of my skins. They just intrude on the viewport, and provide things that aren't needed - a visit counter (your visitors don't care how many other people have been there before them), an "about" popup (most skins provide their own style-matched mechanism for that), and commenting (once the spammers find your site, you might as well turn that one off).

Before adding any screen clutter to your albums, make sure there's a good reason for drawing attention away from the images.

davidekholm

Posts: 3,491
Registered: 18-Oct-2002

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 29 Jun 20, 11:57

in response to: JeffTucker

Reply

I react to "Dave" too even if Swedes simply call me "David"

. I've updated jAlbum's widget injection code to drop the type="text/javascript attribute. Any other things to adjust with the widget injection code?

AndreWolff

Posts: 1,246
Registered: 14-Dec-2007

Re: What has changed the past 9 years that might break a skin rebuild?
Posted: 29 Jun 20, 14:06

in response to: davidekholm

Reply

WidgetErrorsInVSCodel.PNG (272.3 KB)

davidekholm wrote:
Any other things to adjust with the widget injection code?

If you open the injected code in VSCode, you see 2 errors. see enclosed screenshot.

Corrected code:

<div id="jalbumwidgetcontainer"></div>
<script>
_jaSkin = "FancyBox";
_jaStyle = "Gray-Textile.css";
_jaVersion = "20.2.7";
_jaGeneratorType = "desktop";
_jaLanguage = "en";
_jaPageType = "index";
_jaRootPath = ".";
_jaUserId = "107704";
var script = document.createElement("script");
script.type = "text/javascript";
script.src = "http"+("https:"==document.location.protocol?"s":"")+"://jalbum.net/widgetapi/load.js";
document.getElementById("jalbumwidgetcontainer").appendChild(script);
</script>

Edited by: AndreWolff on 29-Jun-2020 14:14