Up to date news on what our developers are working on and where they are at.
Comments from developers:
"As I mentioned in the thread, I'm working on search, but not making as much progress as I hoped.
I did add download-statistics recently on the user-profile and photo management page. :-)
EDIT: Also I fixed some smaller bugs"
"- added a forum a button 'previous page'
- jump from the admin board to the last page of a forum thread. And to the last message (with an anchor tag)
- show most recent searches
- add more text to attract search robots
- front page update for better SEO
- Added small photo on the front page
- Created extra role for powerusers
working on the item " view more then 24 images. Like 48, 96. Create a small select box to do that (with cookie)"
New Feature: photos per page drop-down box 24,48,96
Look in the page bar at the top of any gallery or page that has thumbnails and you will see a little box with a down arrow. Click the arrow and you can select either 24, 48 or 96 thumbnails to be displayed per page.
This dramatically decreases the amount of pages to look through and is quite a convenience.
24,48,96 is wonderful! when SXC was in its initial days bandwidth would have been a consideration. now, 96 thumbnails is better! we don't have to have more page views, and we can see more at a glance, even though it would mean scrolling down.
I guess it depends on the size of your monitor.
Also some people have a screen that they can turn portrait instead of landscape. :-)
yeah. good point.
Yesterday we had the highest amount of traffic on the site since we opened.
The statistics show that we are on a roll!
Check it out everybody, Jay reworked the list of photographers and included the link to the photographers list in the blue bar.
You can change the order of the list to read in order of:
The selection buttons are at the top of the list.
Your name will appear in red so it's easy to find where you are.
That gives us stats that makes for competition. The race to the top is on!
I wonder if it would be possible to use a bold in addition to or in place of the red.
Ten to 15 percent of the male population has some form of color blindness. This sometimes can make it difficult to see the difference between black and red (depending on the contrast conditions of the background color).
As it is I have to look very very carefully to see any difference between the red type and the black type. If the red type were red and bold it would make seeing the name less dependent on perfect color vision.
It is red AND bold at the moment; I can do some font-size tweaking I guess. Good suggestion, never thought about color blindness in this case.
The text stands out a bit more now, thanks!
It seems that the bold on the font used is not much different from the not -bold.
If the red were a bit more orange it would help even more. Just slightly more orange.
It is blue now. And the font-size is one pixel bigger. I could not see much difference either between bold and normal. Must be the font-family. (Arial)
Oh, youre on a Mac, so you see a different font-face. Helvetica I suppose. And the fonts are rendered different then on a win-machine.
Blue is much better! Thanks!
Arial is a standard font family on OS X. The screen rendering is different from Windows. Many long time Windows users complain that Mac fonts look "fuzzy" or "blurry" on screen. This is due to the different approaches Windows and OS X take for on screen display.
Windows tends to alter the shape of characters on screen to make the type easier to read. OS X tries to keep the shape of the letters as close to the original font design as possible. The two platforms also use different technologies to antialias the edges of type.
I always thought OS X would try to keep it as close as possible to print (which is probably what a lot fonts were designed for, but their is a difference).
Here's a better explanation of the differences
Font smoothing, anti-aliasing, and sub-pixel rendering - Joel on Software
Coming from the world of print and press the Apple method seems more natural for me.
I'd love the photographers lists to be numbered (for competitive reasons)
I agree Michael. It would be easier to track your position without having to count down from the top.
Yes, maybe I should add numbers to it. I count my ranking too every day.
Be first and you won't have to count! :P
Can anyone explain the sort by alphabetical?
In my dictionary 'fishmonk' preceeds 'zela'. Not on our list though...
Are the first bunch approvers, admin or just lucky?
Not a complaint - just curious. U no me.
I think in the alphabetical sorting which is used here currently the big letters at the start of the names "win" and only after them all the names with a small letter at the beginning follow from A to Z.
You're right - I'd not noticed. That'll learn me for not capitalising on my name.
@21: Good point. I will fix this problem soon.
Thanks Jay, now it's fine and nicely numbered, too :)
Exactly. The numbers ;). Thanks!