Page 33 of 33

Re: Reverse TPFC PageTitle Sequence for Better Visibility

Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 8:39 am
by HairyPorter
shnbwmn wrote:@HairyPorter
Thank you for making these suggestions, and so clearly too. I think it's something a lot of people (myself included) may have at some point been annoyed by, however I for one never thought of making a post about it. Thanks again :)
You're welcome, but there's no need to thank me actually.

Surely PageTitle sequence can be as moveable as the portable software discussed at TPFC Forum ? Or at least this is my layperson's understanding (or misunderstanding). :D

Re: Reverse TPFC PageTitle Sequence for Better Visibility

Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 7:36 pm
by Andrew Lee
HairyPorter wrote:This topic is often mentioned with solutions at the phpBB Support Forum itself, while a method is also posted in its Knowledge Base documentation -- see below. None mentioned any incompatibility with phpBB code version upgrades.
Thanks for your research on this matter. It is consistent with what my earlier findings, which is the modification of 2 core PHP files "viewtopic.php" and "viewforum.php".

However, seeing that others have gone down the same route, and as you mentioned with no upgrade compatibility issues reported, I have made the necessary code changes.

Re: Reverse TPFC PageTitle Sequence for Better Visibility

Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2017 4:18 am
by HairyPorter
Andrew Lee wrote:However, seeing that others have gone down the same route, and as you mentioned with no upgrade compatibility issues reported, I have made the necessary code changes.
Thanks Andrew ! As of the 1st (lucky) Friday the 13th of 2017 (13 Jan 2017), TPFC is fully tab & history friendly now. :D

Re: New designs for TPFC by tproli

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:11 am
by billon
@Andrew Lee:

How about increasing max dimension of entries' screenshots from current 1024x768 to 1366x768 or even 1920x1080? No need to increase current max size (1MB), just dimension.
1024x768 seems outdated

Re: New designs for TPFC by tproli

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:33 pm
by Andrew Lee
Sounds reasonable.. will work on that...

Update: Done. Maximum res increased to 1920x1080.

Re: New designs for TPFC by tproli

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2019 4:13 pm
by Midas
Yes, HD* is pretty much the new default -- even for small screens like mobile phones.

*) 1920x1080. Even so called Half-HD (1920x720) is loosing out.

Re: New designs for TPFC by tproli

Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2020 8:29 pm
by billon
Andrew Lee wrote: Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:33 pm Update: Done. Maximum res increased to 1920x1080.
Great!
Also, please update listed requirements to avoid confusion:
Resolution.png
Resolution.png (8 KiB) Viewed 99302 times

Re: New designs for TPFC by tproli

Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2020 8:37 pm
by Andrew Lee
Ops.. amended.

Re: New designs for TPFC by tproli

Posted: Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:12 am
by Specular
I think one thing to keep in mind is that the area for screenshots is smaller than 1080p on the actual site. I'm always fond on maintaining legibility in screenshots if they'll be viewed at smaller widths more often that not.

Eg: at fullscreen on a 1440p monitor (2560px wide) the area for the screenshot on the site when viewed in the entry itself is only 1121px wide (accounting for padding). Anything higher will be scaled down. At 1500px wide (eg: a windowed browser on a 1080p or higher monitor) and the area becomes only 828px wide, more than 2x smaller than a full 1080p screenshot.

I don't think this necessitates making the flexible width entry elements on the site wider but rather is just something to be mindful of when choosing screenshots imo (particularly if one is wanting to draw attention to the UI of a program).

Re: New designs for TPFC by tproli

Posted: Fri Apr 17, 2020 7:02 pm
by webfork
Specular wrote: Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:12 am I'm always fond on maintaining legibility in screenshots if they'll be viewed at smaller widths more often that not.
It may not represent the majority of our users, but I definitely want to maintain readability for mobile devices as well. I occasionally check the site on my phone and very large images are not helpful there.

While I agree with billon that the 1024x768 size limit is outdated, and certainly one or two graphics programs I've tested have pushed for more room. However, at least for my own entries, I'll try to maintain smaller screenshots and (where possible) use slideshow-style animations to show off multiple features.