- Development - lists.drupal.org

[drupal-devel] [bug] comment preview "Required" is easily bypassed
by Jeremy 14 Sep '05

14 Sep '05

Issue status update for http://drupal.org/node/28420 Post a follow up: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/28420 Project: Drupal Version: cvs Component: comment.module Category: bug reports Priority: normal Assigned to: Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org Reported by: Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org Updated by: Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org Status: patch (code needs review) Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/form_validation.patch (2.72 KB) Here's a completely rewritten version of the patch, based on an email discussion with Dries. This provides a more generic interface that can be used to validate other form submissions, not just comments. The patch introduces two new functions, form_token() and form_validate(). The first function uses a private key and a public key to set a token in a hidden field. The second function validates the token. The patch also updates the comment module, demonstrating how these new functions are used. More information as to how the patch works can be found in the comments that are within the code. Based on my own experiences on kerneltrap.org, this patch blocks 99% of the current comment spammers. Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org Previous comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 08 Aug 2005 01:55:34 +0000 : Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org Setting "Preview comment" to "Required" does not strictly require that the comment be previewed first. This is being abused by spammers to quickly and efficiently post spam comments. I discovered this after I added a new feature to my new spam module [1] to auto-blacklist spammer IP addresses, allowing me to block comment spammers when they preview a comment and thus preventing them from ever inserting their spam into my database. I configured my comment module to "require" comment previews, and yet found that the comments were slipping past my filter. I finally realized what the spammer is doing is setting $_POST['op'] to 'Post comment', effectively bypassing the preview phase. I'm currently looking for a clean solution to this. At the moment the only idea I have is to generate a token at the preview phase, and validate the token at the post phase. Unfortunately the token would have to be stored in the databse between the preview and the post, which adds overhead. Alternatively, I've considered using a time-based hash which would constantly update depending on the time of day. This could easily be validated without storing anything in the database. If too long has gone between the preview and the post, an additional preview step would be required... The down side here is that the time-based hash would be publically available, and thus the spammer could easily duplicate it in their script. A private key could solve for that, but increases the complexity as it adds a configuration step. I have the feeling I'm missing a simpler, cleaner solution. Suggestions? [1] http://kerneltrap.org/jeremy/drupal/spam/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 08 Aug 2005 02:26:21 +0000 : moshe weitzman even if you get this fixed, won't these bots just add a preview step? this 'preview required' feature is designed to maintain high quality submissions by forcing users to proof read. it isn;t designed for security. i think you want to hook into comment_validate(). just add a hook here - there is already a hook_comment() waiting for you to add an operation. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 08 Aug 2005 08:49:30 +0000 : Eaton I posted a patch a few days ago (http://drupal.org/node/28255) that adds validation and form construction hooks for comments. It's similar to the one that the captcha module uses, though it adds comment form_pre and form_post hooks instead of a single comment form hook. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 08 Aug 2005 13:30:34 +0000 : Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/comment.module_11.patch (2.5 KB) > even if you get this fixed, won't these bots just add a preview step? Eventually, yes, but it drastically changes their ability to fling spam at a site. As is, they simply have a script that shoots data out at high speed without having to wait for messages to return from the server. It is the server that is doing all the work, thus making it simple for a spammer to DoS a site. If "preview required" really meant "preview required", they would be forced to first automate clicking "preview", and then wait for a response before clicking "submit". This requires more resources on their side, and allows us to add delays after clicking "preview" (if we detect that they are a spammer) further using their resources. > this 'preview required' feature is designed to maintain high quality > submissions by forcing users to proof read. it isn;t designed for security. Regardless of the intention, I was misled to believe that configuring my site to require previews would require that all comments were first previewed. As a site administrator, I would prefer to know that "required" really means "required". > i think you want to hook into comment_validate(). just add a hook here - > there is already a hook_comment() waiting for you to add an operation. Yes and no. Ultimately yes that will work and will allow my spam module to prevent the spam from ever being posted. But it still leaves the greatest burden on the web server, instead of on the spammer. The spammer can still use a very simple script that only pushes data, and thus can generate spam at an unbelievable rapid rate. Here is an example patch to enforce "preview required". It's one idea, I'm sure there are better ones. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 08 Aug 2005 14:01:38 +0000 : Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/comment.module_12.patch (1.4 KB) Here's a second version of the patch that doesn't require any manual configuration. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 08 Aug 2005 16:27:27 +0000 : Jose A Reyero I like this idea, and the patch looks good Still, I think it misses something, like some timestamp related hash, because once you get the hash code you can post multiple comments with that. Another problem I can think of is, what happens when a cron run happens between the preview and the post?? I'm afraid comments would get lost For this second problem, I think a key generated only once after module activation could do. About the first one....mmm... I'll sit down for a while and think..... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 09 Aug 2005 12:27:20 +0000 : Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/comment.module_13.patch (1.33 KB) > I think it misses something, like some timestamp related hash, because > once you get the hash code you can post multiple comments with that. Using a timestamp will mean that the comment form "expires". That is, if you wait too long to preview your comment, it will generate an error when you try to post. Yes, technically a spammer could post one real comment, then based on what was in the session from that they could post the same identical comment over and over, so long as it was attached to the same node. But this is not what they do, they try and spread their spam throughout your webpage. Furthermore, the spam module is perfectly capable of detecting and preventing this. > Another problem I can think of is, what happens when a cron run happens > between the preview and the post?? I'm afraid comments would get lost The key is only generated once, that's what the first test is about. In any case, in the unlikely event that the key were to change between preview and post they would simply have to post a second time. My earlier patch wasn't quite right, I was testing the token in the wrong place. This patch fixes that. BTW: This is beneficial for maintaining high quality submissions too, as prior to this change someone could: 1) enter a comment 2) press preview 3) completely change their comment (introducing a mistake) 4) press submit and the comment (mistake and all) would go into the database unpreviewed After this change: 1) enter a comment 2) press preview 3) completely change their comment (introducing a mistake) 4) press submit and they get an error because they didn't preview their changes - forcing them to preview once after any change ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 10 Aug 2005 03:50:33 +0000 : Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org FWIW: I've been getting slammed by spam attacks this whole week. Installing this patch has made a huge difference. Well over 100 spam attempts per minute (sometimes two and three times that) and I hardly notice the spammer, whereas before it was choking my database. (Granted, the spammer has not yet upgraded his script to first preview, then submit. But even if he did it wouldn't help him as testing has verified that the new spam module would prevent the comments from ever getting to the database.) Additionally, user and anonymous (nonspam) comments continue to show up at a normal rate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 16 Aug 2005 14:08:04 +0000 : Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org I would love to see _any_ discussion on this. Drupal is currently too easy to spam, with little effort on the spammer's side, and lots of resources wasted on the Drupal side. A patch like this will greatly increase the spammer's burden, and make it possible to effectively block even the most aggressive spammer attacks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 17 Aug 2005 16:24:04 +0000 : Jose A Reyero Well, this patch is definitely better than what we have, and would save some spam for sure. But maybe keeping track, at the session level, of generated hashes for a user, and then removing them when the comment is sent, could do the work. This way we can forget about previewing comments or not, and also the "permission" to post the comment would expire when the session expires. Any randomly generated value could do for this, no need for complex hashes, but having nid and pid in the hash would add some extra security. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 17 Aug 2005 19:58:02 +0000 : breyten Jeremy, a big +1 on the idea, but why not generate the private key when it is actually needed (Ie, when displaying the comment form), instead of wasting a _cron() hook on it? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 18 Aug 2005 03:20:02 +0000 : Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org > Well, this patch is definitely better than what we have, and would save some spam for sure. It is continuing to work very well on my site, which seems to be under nearly perpetual spam attacks from multiple sources. > But maybe keeping track, at the session level, of generated hashes for a user, and then > removing them when the comment is sent, could do the work. The catch is: the key has to be something unique to the server, not guessable or learnable from the outside Simply storing the hash data in the session alone is not enough, as then the spammer could create any random data and store it in the session. That said, the hash could be generated off something other than the text of the comment as it is now, so that a preview is not required. I'll look at doing something like that and submit another patch. > This way we can forget about previewing comments or not, and also the "permission" to > post the comment would expire when the session expires. Any randomly generated value > could do for this, no need for complex hashes, but having nid and pid in the hash would > add some extra security. nid and pid alone are worthless, as they are easy to learn. The pid can always be 0 (spam is rarely attached to a pre-existing comment). The nid is obtained in the path of where the spam is being posted. The solution is a "private-key", which is what my patch adds. Then sure, hash the private key plus the nid and the pid, and you've got enough protection to prevent most spammers. To make it even more secure, automatic rey-keying could be easily accomplished. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 18 Aug 2005 04:09:10 +0000 : Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/comment.module_15.patch (1.18 KB) The attached patch: 1) gets rid of the _cron() hook 2) no longer requires that comments be previewed Prior to this patch, comment spammers were able to send data to a Drupal server acting as though they'd filled out a comment form and pressed submit. As they didn't actually use the form, they could submit spam comments at an obscene rate. With this patch, comment spammers will have to actually load the form, enter text, and press submit. Yes, that can still be automated, but it takes much more work and slows them down, as they have to wait for the entry form to load each time. Unfortunately a spammer could manually submit one comment, then re-use that same session info over and over to attach repeated spam comments to the same node. Such an attempt would be detected and blocked by the spam module if enabled, but again such a session re-use attack could be done without loading the form each time. Fortunately there is much less gain for a spammer to submit 100 spam comments on the same page, versus submitting 100 spam comments each on a different page as they do now. Ideas to improve upon this concept include: - re-key every day or week, changing the private key regularly to be sure it couldn't ever be permanently cracked - add a key table, and generate a unique key for every comment form. essentially, upon comment form creation generate a random key which is stored both in a database table and in the session. when a comment is submited, look for the key from the session in the database table, if a match is found delete it from the database table and post the comment. this would prevent session re-use, but adds overhead. i don't know if it's worth it, perhaps as an external module if the hooks were available. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:55:11 +0000 : drumm <?php form_set_error('error', t('Validation error, please be sure cookies are enabled on your browser.')); ?> form_set_error [2]()'s fist argument should be the name of a form field, not 'error.' Using (..., 'error') would be better in this case. And the actual message needs work. Since this is a hidden field I don't think it has anything to do with cookies. [2] http://drupaldocs.org/api/head/function/form_set_error ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:56:41 +0000 : drumm The unclosed link in my last update was supposed to say drupal_set_message(..., 'error') ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 20 Aug 2005 16:00:15 +0000 : Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/comment.module_16.patch (1.11 KB) drupal_set_message(..., 'error') isn't sufficient to prevent the comment from being posted. I have instead updated the patch to set the error on the hidden 'token' form field. I have updated the message to read: "Unable to validate your comment, please try again. If this error persists, please contact the site administrator." If you don't like the error message, better suggestions are welcome. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 03:16:06 +0000 : Jeremy(a)kerneltrap.org Any feedback on this patch? I have been running it on my website for a couple of weeks, and it has completely stopped the most persistent auto-spam scripts that had been posting poker type comments constantly to my site. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 10 Sep 2005 18:12:15 +0000 : Zed Pobre This patch is against HEAD? It doesn't want to apply to my 2.6.3 comment.module. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 11 Sep 2005 18:09:08 +0000 : Abalieno It's is for cvs but I'm trying to manually apply it to 4.6.3. Will comment later to tell how it went. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:49:17 +0000 : Abalieno Well, it worked. No spam at all in more than a day. I don't know if other users are having problem but this patch broke the tool the spammer was using. :)

1 0

Re: [drupal-devel] Mail.inc
by Pat Collins 14 Sep '05

14 Sep '05

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 22:06:29 +0200, Robert Douglass <rob(a)robshouse.net> wrote : > Is anyone actually working on mail.inc and if so, how far along are you? > I've got one working. Still doing some unit testing. I also have to read the contribution documentation a bit more closely so I don't sound like an idiot and make it easy if it is decided to be included. Pat

1 0

[drupal-devel] [task] Improvments to Filter UI
by moshe weitzman 14 Sep '05

14 Sep '05

Issue status update for http://drupal.org/node/27364 Post a follow up: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/27364 Project: Drupal Version: cvs Component: filter.module Category: tasks Priority: normal Assigned to: Bèr Kessels Reported by: Bèr Kessels Updated by: moshe weitzman Status: patch (code needs work) the most visible place for this 'input format' term is on the node form. thats where ordinary users see this stuff. in that context, i don't think 'input filters is an improvement over input formats. the question we are asking our users is 'what is the format of your post'?, not what filters do you want applied ... just my .02. sorry i wasn't in IRC when this came up. this need not hold up the whole patch. moshe weitzman Previous comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:30:54 +0000 : Bèr Kessels This is a mockup for the Filter UI. Currently it is soo complex, that I dare to call it broken. Please comment on this, for I will not ake any patches, when the general idea is disliked. The idea is t split filters and input formats better. Filters are filters, defined in modules. Input formats are bundles of filters. This is how we have it ATM, but the interface fails to communicate that. I tried to develop a consistent (with the rest of Drupal) interfce that makes it clearer what is what. The menu is as follows: * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters ** ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:37:10 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_list1.png (16.34 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> see attachement 1 *** filters ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:39:02 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_add.png (23.42 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> see attachement 2, tab 2 *** filters ** Note: The default checkbox lmay seem a bit odd. But checking it will remove the "default status" from the current "default" one and make this one "default". The help text, and a drupal_set_message should explain this. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:40:08 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format.png (22.17 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> clicking a 'configure' link in the table of attachement 1 *** filters ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:40:55 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-filters_list.png (36.24 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters >> see attachement 4 ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:41:40 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit.png (22.63 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters >> clicking a 'configure' link in the table of attachement 4 ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 25 Jul 2005 14:46:27 +0000 : Bèr Kessels IMO this makes the interface easier. But other disagree. And because it also removes one feature: (being able to use E.g. HTML in different input formats, with different settings) I'll simply wont fix this :( ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:36:12 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy.patch (10.28 KB) I decided to go for it anyway. Be it in a slightly different way then my initial mockups. The difference is that I left the filters where they are, hidden beneath the formats. So, here is the patch that makes the filter UI more consistent with screens like blocs, menus, vocabularies et al also nice to note is that: 93 lines are added, 104 are removed. So netto we have less code :) (cvs diff filter.module | grep ^+ | wc -l) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:37:02 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_list_html.png (44.64 KB) Here is how the listing now looks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:37:57 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format_html.png (113.71 KB) And the "configure" screen. The 'add' screen looks exactly the same, only with the default values pre-filled. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:39:19 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format_too_long.png (121.82 KB) Oh, And here is a really nice example of why the current screen is no good. And here I "only" have four roles. I run a site with 12 roles, imagine this screen then! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:48:35 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_HEAD.patch (10.24 KB) And here is a pathc for HEAD (I forgot that I developed this on a 4.6.2 codebase. Sorry) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:55:25 +0000 : stefan nagtegaal I like this very, very much! This is - indeed - much better than the current UI. This always fits, and makes the life of people who use a fixed width theme much nicer.. Ber, FYI (you probably know this too), 'admin/access' does also break fixed width themes due to the fact that it expands the width of the table when more roles are being added.. Good catch! I like it much more this way.. +1 from me... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:27:34 +0000 : Dries The code style needs work (spaces, tabs, 'as' -> 'AS'), the code comments need work, and debug statements should be removed. Screenshots look good to me. db_query('UPDATE {filter_formats} SET cache = %d, name = \'%s\', roles = \'%s\' WHERE format = %d', (int)$cache, $name, $roles, $format); can be written better/shorter quote-wise. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:04:16 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_HEAD_0.patch (10.37 KB) Dries, thanks a lot for the review. OI fixed your comments. Or so I hope. code-style.pl was of no use (can that *please* be removed from core?) because it chokes on the help texts. It also pointed out a lot of old formatting isues, whic, when fixed wuold flood this patch with unrelated fixes. I tried to narow my style-searching to the areas I touched. And I made the comments more verbous. The query is fixed. it saves no characters, but looks better now. Thanks for the tip. The print_r..... blush. thats what I get for not running my default grep -r print_r on my code after finishing up... I could not find a lot of spaces and tabs. So it lmight be that i missed one. I triple checked it though. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:32:21 +0000 : Steven Moving the role settings inward does fix the wide-table problem, but it makes the filter configuration much more opaque. We could perhaps fix this by showing the roles as a comma-separate list in the input formats table. Such a list can wrap and will not stretch the table. Other than that: * Having the instructions for the Roles and Filters form_group() at the bottom is a bit weird. The distance is too big. * The table that was used for toggling filters on/off was much more compact before, and IMO a lot clearer. Why change to a flat list with the description staggered below each item? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:31:30 +0000 : Bèr Kessels consistancy, consistancy and more consistancy. There really is nothing worse that having a different 'concept' of UI for every thing in Drupal. We are going in the right direction, with the blocks being editable objects, menus acting like that, taxonomy, users, etc.. I wanted to make this act similar. I am not at all happy with the fact tah the list is still a form. But we need this, for setting the default. A big -1 for a comma-separate list. That is extremely hackish, even worse useabilitywise and just silly * we should avoid typing when not needed. * we should avoid errors on input, when they can be avoided (a typo is made very easy, I know all about it) Form set errors won't fix that usability -wise. I agree that you sort-of loose the overview. But IMO that is a minor loss comared to what we gain, usability-wise. The wtoo-wide was onlywhat triggered me. But do not think that I am noly making this patch to fix that issue. This patch is there to improve usability, through consistancy. o make drupal behave the same in most places in admin. If you know one screen, you know most of them. We really should move away from custom-hacks for every page, because that is useability rule #1: consistancy. Stadardisation, even if sometimes a custom hack might make things easier in that single case, it will reduce your overall usability so much that nearly ever it is worth that hack. That select-boxes instead of the table issue: consistancy. As well that it completely broke fluid CSS layouts, my solution is more consistant, and uses forms the way they are meant. If we cannot use $descritption in checkboxes they should be removed. but IMO it feels much more consistant. Tables are for tabular data, and this is simply a list of items, with additional data. And i do not really get what you mean with "too far down". Do you mean that you would like to see the order of the groups different? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 13:31:24 +0000 : Dries I haven't tested Ber's patch yet but looking at the screenshots, it like what I see. I remember being confused by the current filter UI, and often, I still am. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:53:26 +0000 : moshe weitzman I dislike the recent movement away from overview pages. I think we can still provide and overview while allowing editing to happen in a dedicated form. An example in the wrong direction is 'content types' admin. It is impossible to get an overview, and the listing page is worthless. I agree with Steven on this one. It is true that consistency is desirable. But consistent crap is not. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 20:02:39 +0000 : killes(a)www.drop.org I agree with Moshe. Getting a quick overview about what is set how is essential for an admin. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 30 Jul 2005 00:27:15 +0000 : Robrecht Jacques Overall I like the screenshots. Did not test the patch. Bèr, what I think Steven (#15) meant by "showing the roles as a comma-separate list in the input formats table" is that as an overview page it would be better if you added a list (not an input box!) to screenshot "input-formats_list1.png" (comment #1). Add a column that reads "Roles" (or "Enabled for") and then for each row a comma seperated list of the roles that can use this input format (or maybe even better a HTML list). You would still need to click "configure" to _change_ the roles. The "Default" text (not a radio button) you already show in the "Options" column is something similar: it immediately shows that this input format is the default without you having to go to the "configure" page. Why not do the same for "roles"? If this is what Steven meant, then I tend to agree with him. And to help moshe and killes: maybe you could even add a column that _lists_ the used input filters. Again, only a list, not a way to change it. That's what the "operations" column is for. A table like that will "fluid" better than what we have now, still it is a _complete_ overview of the settings. I could have misunderstand someone... I have the tendency to do that... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:21:32 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements.patch (14.52 KB) by popular demand: a comma separated list. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:24:31 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/format_now_contains_roles.png (22.09 KB) and a screenshot ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 18:39:44 +0000 : Dries Please check your use of print theme('page', $output). Normally, you just return $output. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:54:28 +0000 : Bèr Kessels All instances of theme('page',...) in filter.module are now changed to return ... ; furthermore, the patch is the same. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:04:02 +0000 : Uwe Hermann Bèr, I think you forgot to attach your updated patch. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:27:39 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements_2.patch (13.52 KB) my email client has this nice warning system for attachements. Maybe drupal should search for the word attachement too, and when no att. found give an error ;). Or maybe i should just learn to pay attention. Guess that is easier. Anyway, here it is. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 20:22:54 +0000 : Dries I wanted to apply this patch but: 1. I can't change the default input format. 'Save'-button doesn't work. 2. I got confused by the fact I can't change the roles of the default filter. I think the form group description should explain this. 3. form_group(t(filter)) should be form_group(t('filter'), ...). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 20:51:24 +0000 : m3avrck Found a few more issues: If I go into 'Configure' for 'PHP Code' and click the 'Configure' tab at the top and then click 'list filters' link in the text, I get this warning with PHP5 warning: Missing argument 1 for filter_admin_format() in \drupal\modules\filter.module on line 378. Also, it is sort of confusing as to what the 'List' tab implies. For example, if I click on 'input formats' in the admin menu, I get a list of the current filters. When I click 'configure' for one of those, I see the options for that filter. However, it says 'list' in one of the tab, which doesn't really mean much. I thought that was the list of filters, not the options for that filter. That should be cleaned up. Also, there is no way to get back to the full list of filters unless you click on 'input formats' in the admin menu. A setting/link to fix this would be great. Also, where is the link to add filters??? I think the options/layout/tabs should mimic of that of admin > users. So on admin > input formats, it has the tabs 'list', 'add format' ... very clear and consistent. On a configure page for a filter, it should have 'list', 'view', 'configure', 'rearrange' ... this would make it easier to navigate and get back to the original list of filters. Make sense? I think this and Dries' comments put this patch over the top :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 01:48:55 +0000 : tag In my initial battle to figure out this module's (quite nice) functionality, what tripped me up the most was actually the nomenclature. The way I keep it straight in my head now is to translate "input format" to "filter set". If you view those (the current) screens with this in mind, I think it's a lot easier to understand what's what. It sort of describes this in the help text, but the terms "filter" and "input format" don't really convey the relationship between the two -- there's no way to intuit that an "input format" is a collection of "filters". Not to my mind at least... and well, we know nobody reads instructions... Are there any technicalities that make renaming "input format" to "filter set" not accurate? Or does someone have a better term/terms to better show the relationship of these elements? (I'm aware of filters in servlet architectures but I don't think there's much of a collision with that usage). Anyhow, I guess this doesn't quite address the UI controls and/or layout, but would still help a lot. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 06:35:34 +0000 : Bèr Kessels I prefer filter set. In fact: I like it a lot. Anyone else ideas on this? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 10:18:18 +0000 : Dries I too had problems with the terminology; it took me months to get used to 'input formats' versus 'filters'. Using 'filter sets' might improve the situation -- especially from an administrator's point of view when you have to wrap your head around the UI/difference. I'm not native English, but 'filter set' sounds more explanatory, yet slightly more geeky so I'm not sure if it flies for users who don't need to understand the underlying concepts (eg. under the node and comment submission forms). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 11:00:05 +0000 : Bèr Kessels a heads up: I ma redoing the patch. But decided no to change the name yet. That is a too big change. IT should be in a separate issue, IMO. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 15:27:43 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_2.patch (13.57 KB) * Bugs as reported by dries fixed. * The [add] tab not appearing is due to your menu caching, refresh that please. * Fixed an additional bug: Some agents do not send TRUE for disabled checkboxen. Also in current filter admin. and people: we have a problem. Deleting a filter trows errors, due to the revisions changes. that happens in filter module now, but also after this patch. I have too little knowledge of the filter system to fix that, and IMO that is a separate issue. It should be fixed right after this patch is committed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 15:57:18 +0000 : Bèr Kessels FYI: the delete bug is waiting here: http://drupal.org/node/30781 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 18:18:17 +0000 : m3avrck Get this warning in PHP5: Warning: Missing argument 1 for filter_admin_format() in \modules\filter.module on line 379 I have traced this error back to line 240. Why are there no callback arguments like above on line 235? Looks like a source of a problem/bug here so needs to be addressed, not sure exactly how to fix it myself (otherwise I would). Should be easy it seems. Also, for a quick and easy usability improvement, on line 239, change t('list') to t('view') ... makes the menus less confusing. After those fixes, looks like this patch is ready to be committed :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 18:23:27 +0000 : m3avrck Also, this dialog is a bit confusing: "Choose which roles may use this filter format You are editing the default format. For the default format, all roles must be enabled. Therefore you cannot change them. " Maybe make it so that first line doesn't appear there on that page? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:35:50 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_2_0.patch (13.59 KB) changed that line of help. Can this please still be taken in consideration before the freeze? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 18:29:28 +0000 : m3avrck Can't apply patch, getting error: Patch malformed at line 287 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:10:07 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements_2_0.patch (14.19 KB) strange. the dowloaded one breaks too, yet the one i uploaded stll works. anyway, rerolled ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:25:25 +0000 : Dries IMO, the form function needs more work. You need to group the form construction and the form saving. Right now, when you don't provide a title, you are given an error and an emptied form. This may be a left-over from the original code though but it would be cool if you could tidy this up. The form_group() description still need a trailing point. There is a broken link in the following help text on the 'add input format'-page: /If you notice some filters are causing conflicts in the output, you can [rearrange] them./. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:30:12 +0000 : Bèr Kessels dont have time anymore. sorry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 20:50:34 +0000 : m3avrck new patch soon! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 22:10:25 +0000 : m3avrck Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter.module_10.patch (20.27 KB) Ok here's a new patch. Lot's of fixes in this one (all of the ones from above except the one noted below), including support for the new revisions patch. Additionally, 'input formats' has been renamed to 'input filters'. After debate on IRC, and the above comments in this post, it seems that 'input formats' is somewhat misleading and doesn't make sense. 'input filters' clears this up and makes sense to both native and non-native English speakers (as tested in IRC anywho ;)). This also makes more sense since Drupal refers to everything as 'filters' and not 'formats'. However, there is one issue still left unresolved: If you create a new input filter, and don't specify a title, page reloads clearing all filled in fields and prompts the error message. Additionally, a blank filter is created. Wanted to get this patch posted, I'll look at it later today but if someone can get this fixed easily, please do, thanks! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 22:38:05 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements_3.patch (21.49 KB) this patch should fix the issue m3 rasies abuot amepty formats being created. Yes, i use a simple drupal_goto, in case of a for error. And no, it is not very easy to get the old posted data back.

1 0

[drupal-devel] [task] Improvments to Filter UI
by Bèr Kessels 14 Sep '05

14 Sep '05

Issue status update for http://drupal.org/node/27364 Post a follow up: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/27364 Project: Drupal Version: cvs Component: filter.module Category: tasks Priority: normal Assigned to: Bèr Kessels Reported by: Bèr Kessels Updated by: Bèr Kessels Status: patch (code needs work) Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements_3.patch (21.49 KB) this patch should fix the issue m3 rasies abuot amepty formats being created. Yes, i use a simple drupal_goto, in case of a for error. And no, it is not very easy to get the old posted data back. Bèr Kessels Previous comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:30:54 +0000 : Bèr Kessels This is a mockup for the Filter UI. Currently it is soo complex, that I dare to call it broken. Please comment on this, for I will not ake any patches, when the general idea is disliked. The idea is t split filters and input formats better. Filters are filters, defined in modules. Input formats are bundles of filters. This is how we have it ATM, but the interface fails to communicate that. I tried to develop a consistent (with the rest of Drupal) interfce that makes it clearer what is what. The menu is as follows: * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters ** ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:37:10 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_list1.png (16.34 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> see attachement 1 *** filters ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:39:02 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_add.png (23.42 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> see attachement 2, tab 2 *** filters ** Note: The default checkbox lmay seem a bit odd. But checking it will remove the "default status" from the current "default" one and make this one "default". The help text, and a drupal_set_message should explain this. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:40:08 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format.png (22.17 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> clicking a 'configure' link in the table of attachement 1 *** filters ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:40:55 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-filters_list.png (36.24 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters >> see attachement 4 ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:41:40 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit.png (22.63 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters >> clicking a 'configure' link in the table of attachement 4 ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 25 Jul 2005 14:46:27 +0000 : Bèr Kessels IMO this makes the interface easier. But other disagree. And because it also removes one feature: (being able to use E.g. HTML in different input formats, with different settings) I'll simply wont fix this :( ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:36:12 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy.patch (10.28 KB) I decided to go for it anyway. Be it in a slightly different way then my initial mockups. The difference is that I left the filters where they are, hidden beneath the formats. So, here is the patch that makes the filter UI more consistent with screens like blocs, menus, vocabularies et al also nice to note is that: 93 lines are added, 104 are removed. So netto we have less code :) (cvs diff filter.module | grep ^+ | wc -l) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:37:02 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_list_html.png (44.64 KB) Here is how the listing now looks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:37:57 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format_html.png (113.71 KB) And the "configure" screen. The 'add' screen looks exactly the same, only with the default values pre-filled. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:39:19 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format_too_long.png (121.82 KB) Oh, And here is a really nice example of why the current screen is no good. And here I "only" have four roles. I run a site with 12 roles, imagine this screen then! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:48:35 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_HEAD.patch (10.24 KB) And here is a pathc for HEAD (I forgot that I developed this on a 4.6.2 codebase. Sorry) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:55:25 +0000 : stefan nagtegaal I like this very, very much! This is - indeed - much better than the current UI. This always fits, and makes the life of people who use a fixed width theme much nicer.. Ber, FYI (you probably know this too), 'admin/access' does also break fixed width themes due to the fact that it expands the width of the table when more roles are being added.. Good catch! I like it much more this way.. +1 from me... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:27:34 +0000 : Dries The code style needs work (spaces, tabs, 'as' -> 'AS'), the code comments need work, and debug statements should be removed. Screenshots look good to me. db_query('UPDATE {filter_formats} SET cache = %d, name = \'%s\', roles = \'%s\' WHERE format = %d', (int)$cache, $name, $roles, $format); can be written better/shorter quote-wise. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:04:16 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_HEAD_0.patch (10.37 KB) Dries, thanks a lot for the review. OI fixed your comments. Or so I hope. code-style.pl was of no use (can that *please* be removed from core?) because it chokes on the help texts. It also pointed out a lot of old formatting isues, whic, when fixed wuold flood this patch with unrelated fixes. I tried to narow my style-searching to the areas I touched. And I made the comments more verbous. The query is fixed. it saves no characters, but looks better now. Thanks for the tip. The print_r..... blush. thats what I get for not running my default grep -r print_r on my code after finishing up... I could not find a lot of spaces and tabs. So it lmight be that i missed one. I triple checked it though. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:32:21 +0000 : Steven Moving the role settings inward does fix the wide-table problem, but it makes the filter configuration much more opaque. We could perhaps fix this by showing the roles as a comma-separate list in the input formats table. Such a list can wrap and will not stretch the table. Other than that: * Having the instructions for the Roles and Filters form_group() at the bottom is a bit weird. The distance is too big. * The table that was used for toggling filters on/off was much more compact before, and IMO a lot clearer. Why change to a flat list with the description staggered below each item? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:31:30 +0000 : Bèr Kessels consistancy, consistancy and more consistancy. There really is nothing worse that having a different 'concept' of UI for every thing in Drupal. We are going in the right direction, with the blocks being editable objects, menus acting like that, taxonomy, users, etc.. I wanted to make this act similar. I am not at all happy with the fact tah the list is still a form. But we need this, for setting the default. A big -1 for a comma-separate list. That is extremely hackish, even worse useabilitywise and just silly * we should avoid typing when not needed. * we should avoid errors on input, when they can be avoided (a typo is made very easy, I know all about it) Form set errors won't fix that usability -wise. I agree that you sort-of loose the overview. But IMO that is a minor loss comared to what we gain, usability-wise. The wtoo-wide was onlywhat triggered me. But do not think that I am noly making this patch to fix that issue. This patch is there to improve usability, through consistancy. o make drupal behave the same in most places in admin. If you know one screen, you know most of them. We really should move away from custom-hacks for every page, because that is useability rule #1: consistancy. Stadardisation, even if sometimes a custom hack might make things easier in that single case, it will reduce your overall usability so much that nearly ever it is worth that hack. That select-boxes instead of the table issue: consistancy. As well that it completely broke fluid CSS layouts, my solution is more consistant, and uses forms the way they are meant. If we cannot use $descritption in checkboxes they should be removed. but IMO it feels much more consistant. Tables are for tabular data, and this is simply a list of items, with additional data. And i do not really get what you mean with "too far down". Do you mean that you would like to see the order of the groups different? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 13:31:24 +0000 : Dries I haven't tested Ber's patch yet but looking at the screenshots, it like what I see. I remember being confused by the current filter UI, and often, I still am. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:53:26 +0000 : moshe weitzman I dislike the recent movement away from overview pages. I think we can still provide and overview while allowing editing to happen in a dedicated form. An example in the wrong direction is 'content types' admin. It is impossible to get an overview, and the listing page is worthless. I agree with Steven on this one. It is true that consistency is desirable. But consistent crap is not. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 20:02:39 +0000 : killes(a)www.drop.org I agree with Moshe. Getting a quick overview about what is set how is essential for an admin. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 30 Jul 2005 00:27:15 +0000 : Robrecht Jacques Overall I like the screenshots. Did not test the patch. Bèr, what I think Steven (#15) meant by "showing the roles as a comma-separate list in the input formats table" is that as an overview page it would be better if you added a list (not an input box!) to screenshot "input-formats_list1.png" (comment #1). Add a column that reads "Roles" (or "Enabled for") and then for each row a comma seperated list of the roles that can use this input format (or maybe even better a HTML list). You would still need to click "configure" to _change_ the roles. The "Default" text (not a radio button) you already show in the "Options" column is something similar: it immediately shows that this input format is the default without you having to go to the "configure" page. Why not do the same for "roles"? If this is what Steven meant, then I tend to agree with him. And to help moshe and killes: maybe you could even add a column that _lists_ the used input filters. Again, only a list, not a way to change it. That's what the "operations" column is for. A table like that will "fluid" better than what we have now, still it is a _complete_ overview of the settings. I could have misunderstand someone... I have the tendency to do that... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:21:32 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements.patch (14.52 KB) by popular demand: a comma separated list. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:24:31 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/format_now_contains_roles.png (22.09 KB) and a screenshot ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 18:39:44 +0000 : Dries Please check your use of print theme('page', $output). Normally, you just return $output. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:54:28 +0000 : Bèr Kessels All instances of theme('page',...) in filter.module are now changed to return ... ; furthermore, the patch is the same. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:04:02 +0000 : Uwe Hermann Bèr, I think you forgot to attach your updated patch. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:27:39 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements_2.patch (13.52 KB) my email client has this nice warning system for attachements. Maybe drupal should search for the word attachement too, and when no att. found give an error ;). Or maybe i should just learn to pay attention. Guess that is easier. Anyway, here it is. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 20:22:54 +0000 : Dries I wanted to apply this patch but: 1. I can't change the default input format. 'Save'-button doesn't work. 2. I got confused by the fact I can't change the roles of the default filter. I think the form group description should explain this. 3. form_group(t(filter)) should be form_group(t('filter'), ...). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 20:51:24 +0000 : m3avrck Found a few more issues: If I go into 'Configure' for 'PHP Code' and click the 'Configure' tab at the top and then click 'list filters' link in the text, I get this warning with PHP5 warning: Missing argument 1 for filter_admin_format() in \drupal\modules\filter.module on line 378. Also, it is sort of confusing as to what the 'List' tab implies. For example, if I click on 'input formats' in the admin menu, I get a list of the current filters. When I click 'configure' for one of those, I see the options for that filter. However, it says 'list' in one of the tab, which doesn't really mean much. I thought that was the list of filters, not the options for that filter. That should be cleaned up. Also, there is no way to get back to the full list of filters unless you click on 'input formats' in the admin menu. A setting/link to fix this would be great. Also, where is the link to add filters??? I think the options/layout/tabs should mimic of that of admin > users. So on admin > input formats, it has the tabs 'list', 'add format' ... very clear and consistent. On a configure page for a filter, it should have 'list', 'view', 'configure', 'rearrange' ... this would make it easier to navigate and get back to the original list of filters. Make sense? I think this and Dries' comments put this patch over the top :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 01:48:55 +0000 : tag In my initial battle to figure out this module's (quite nice) functionality, what tripped me up the most was actually the nomenclature. The way I keep it straight in my head now is to translate "input format" to "filter set". If you view those (the current) screens with this in mind, I think it's a lot easier to understand what's what. It sort of describes this in the help text, but the terms "filter" and "input format" don't really convey the relationship between the two -- there's no way to intuit that an "input format" is a collection of "filters". Not to my mind at least... and well, we know nobody reads instructions... Are there any technicalities that make renaming "input format" to "filter set" not accurate? Or does someone have a better term/terms to better show the relationship of these elements? (I'm aware of filters in servlet architectures but I don't think there's much of a collision with that usage). Anyhow, I guess this doesn't quite address the UI controls and/or layout, but would still help a lot. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 06:35:34 +0000 : Bèr Kessels I prefer filter set. In fact: I like it a lot. Anyone else ideas on this? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 10:18:18 +0000 : Dries I too had problems with the terminology; it took me months to get used to 'input formats' versus 'filters'. Using 'filter sets' might improve the situation -- especially from an administrator's point of view when you have to wrap your head around the UI/difference. I'm not native English, but 'filter set' sounds more explanatory, yet slightly more geeky so I'm not sure if it flies for users who don't need to understand the underlying concepts (eg. under the node and comment submission forms). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 11:00:05 +0000 : Bèr Kessels a heads up: I ma redoing the patch. But decided no to change the name yet. That is a too big change. IT should be in a separate issue, IMO. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 15:27:43 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_2.patch (13.57 KB) * Bugs as reported by dries fixed. * The [add] tab not appearing is due to your menu caching, refresh that please. * Fixed an additional bug: Some agents do not send TRUE for disabled checkboxen. Also in current filter admin. and people: we have a problem. Deleting a filter trows errors, due to the revisions changes. that happens in filter module now, but also after this patch. I have too little knowledge of the filter system to fix that, and IMO that is a separate issue. It should be fixed right after this patch is committed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 15:57:18 +0000 : Bèr Kessels FYI: the delete bug is waiting here: http://drupal.org/node/30781 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 18:18:17 +0000 : m3avrck Get this warning in PHP5: Warning: Missing argument 1 for filter_admin_format() in \modules\filter.module on line 379 I have traced this error back to line 240. Why are there no callback arguments like above on line 235? Looks like a source of a problem/bug here so needs to be addressed, not sure exactly how to fix it myself (otherwise I would). Should be easy it seems. Also, for a quick and easy usability improvement, on line 239, change t('list') to t('view') ... makes the menus less confusing. After those fixes, looks like this patch is ready to be committed :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 18:23:27 +0000 : m3avrck Also, this dialog is a bit confusing: "Choose which roles may use this filter format You are editing the default format. For the default format, all roles must be enabled. Therefore you cannot change them. " Maybe make it so that first line doesn't appear there on that page? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:35:50 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_2_0.patch (13.59 KB) changed that line of help. Can this please still be taken in consideration before the freeze? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 18:29:28 +0000 : m3avrck Can't apply patch, getting error: Patch malformed at line 287 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:10:07 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements_2_0.patch (14.19 KB) strange. the dowloaded one breaks too, yet the one i uploaded stll works. anyway, rerolled ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:25:25 +0000 : Dries IMO, the form function needs more work. You need to group the form construction and the form saving. Right now, when you don't provide a title, you are given an error and an emptied form. This may be a left-over from the original code though but it would be cool if you could tidy this up. The form_group() description still need a trailing point. There is a broken link in the following help text on the 'add input format'-page: /If you notice some filters are causing conflicts in the output, you can [rearrange] them./. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:30:12 +0000 : Bèr Kessels dont have time anymore. sorry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 20:50:34 +0000 : m3avrck new patch soon! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 22:10:25 +0000 : m3avrck Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter.module_10.patch (20.27 KB) Ok here's a new patch. Lot's of fixes in this one (all of the ones from above except the one noted below), including support for the new revisions patch. Additionally, 'input formats' has been renamed to 'input filters'. After debate on IRC, and the above comments in this post, it seems that 'input formats' is somewhat misleading and doesn't make sense. 'input filters' clears this up and makes sense to both native and non-native English speakers (as tested in IRC anywho ;)). This also makes more sense since Drupal refers to everything as 'filters' and not 'formats'. However, there is one issue still left unresolved: If you create a new input filter, and don't specify a title, page reloads clearing all filled in fields and prompts the error message. Additionally, a blank filter is created. Wanted to get this patch posted, I'll look at it later today but if someone can get this fixed easily, please do, thanks!

1 0

[drupal-devel] [bug] Can't delete subjects with '&' in title
by Cvbge 14 Sep '05

14 Sep '05

Issue status update for http://drupal.org/node/27140 Post a follow up: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/27140 Project: Drupal Version: cvs Component: contact.module Category: bug reports Priority: normal Assigned to: Souvent22 Reported by: m3avrck Updated by: Cvbge -Status: patch (code needs work) +Status: patch (ready to be committed) About the update path: since this module is in cvs only, not in 4.6, then we probably should not worry about data being already in the table. (Although drupal.org is already running on cvs with contact.module :)) Cvbge Previous comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:57:03 +0000 : m3avrck Using the site-wide contact forms, any subjects with an '&' cannot be deleted. Clicking delete for these subjects brings up the expected action flow, however, confirming the delete does nothing. Subject still exists. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 25 Jul 2005 13:45:38 +0000 : m3avrck It appears this issue might be linked with this one: http://drupal.org/node/23685 A problem with mod_rewrite and not the actual contact module. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:51:56 +0000 : Souvent22 Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/contact.module_6.patch (4.7 KB) Redid how contacts work. It now references contacts by ID instead of their category as the unique identifier. It also allows for contacts to have weights, so that one may control where the contact will appear in the listing. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:53:01 +0000 : Souvent22 Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/updates.inc (27.23 KB) This is the update.inc for the database cahnges that goes along with this patch. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:31:37 +0000 : Souvent22 Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/contact.module_7.patch (4.5 KB) Updated patch. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:31:55 +0000 : Souvent22 Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/updates.inc_4.patch (1.29 KB) Updated database patch. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 03 Sep 2005 16:17:21 +0000 : Cvbge Hi, 0. You should keep all changes in one file, i.e. pake one patch, not patch for every file 1. You should include changes for database/database.{mysql,pgsql} 2. IIRC auto_increment was depreciated, you should use db_next_id() (but I see auto_increment in cvs...) 3. You use "WHERE cid = '%s'", but cid is integer so this should probably be %d (although this probably would not break anything..) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 07 Sep 2005 17:31:21 +0000 : Souvent22 Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/contact_full.patch (6.38 KB) Ok, I've taken your suggestions in, and i think I have it this time. Let me know if this is a correct format for a patch. This only fixes the bug of not being able to delete special characters. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 07 Sep 2005 17:37:30 +0000 : m3avrck Check your database updates, the UNIQUE fields don't look right syntactically. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 07 Sep 2005 18:23:07 +0000 : Souvent22 Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/contact_full_0.patch (6.25 KB) Ok, i apologize for the last upload. Pleasle ignore. I send the wrong file. :-[. Anyway, here's a tested, tried, and correct patch. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 07 Sep 2005 18:26:33 +0000 : m3avrck +1 patch works great! Latest HEAD version applied with update.php works great, modifies database correctly for MySQL (and PostgreSQL looks correct as well) and contacts can now be deleted if they have '&' in the subject. Also, dumped entire database and created from modified database.mysql and everything works great. I'd say this patch is ready to be committed! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 07 Sep 2005 21:44:47 +0000 : Cvbge Hi, patch does not applies to currect cvs anymore. For the database.pgsql you need to remove (11) from int(11) and also first "category" from UNIQUE line, so it looks like this: CREATE TABLE contact ( cid int NOT NULL, category varchar(255) NOT NULL default '', recipients text NOT NULL default '', reply text NOT NULL default '', UNIQUE (category), PRIMARY KEY (cid) ); The updates are also not compatibile with postgres, but postgres upgrade path is completly broken in cvs and I'll fix it later, so do not pay attention to it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 13:05:54 +0000 : Souvent22 Hello. Thanks for the feedback. I'm in the middle of fixing it, but i have a question. You'll have to excuse my ignorance with PostGres, I'm not as familiar with it as I am MySQL. With that said, I have a question..... I am trying to make my update where one does not lose data. However, in PostGres, I have to make a seperate "temp" table before hand and then copy the date over the the new table (cause i don't know the exact name of the constraint to drop e.g. the primary key). Basically I'm asking if there is a better suggestion in which I doint have to use a temp table, and i could just manipulate the original table? Thanks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 13:12:35 +0000 : Souvent22 Also, I created a temp name for my temp table. However, for prefix purposes, should I enclose it? Example: $temp_name = rand(); $res = db_query("SELECT * FROM $temp_name"); or $temp_name = rand(); $res = db_query("SELECT * FROM {$temp_name}"); Thanks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 13:55:40 +0000 : Souvent22 Clarification: $temp_name = rand(); db_query("CREATE TABLE $temp_name AS SELECT * FROM {contact}"); $res = db_query("SELECT * FROM $temp_name"); or $temp_name = rand(); db_query("CREATE TABLE {$temp_name} AS SELECT * FROM {contact}"); $res = db_query("SELECT * FROM {$temp_name}"); ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 17:52:06 +0000 : Cvbge "cause i don't know the exact name of the constraint to drop e.g. the primary key " Yes, you know it, it's tablename_pkey. In this case it's contact_pkey. You can drop it by dropping index with it's name (you could drop constraint with it's name but it was not available in 7.2) Adding a column and adding unique attribute is also doable without temp table. You can look at (some) previous updates. But some of them are incorrect ;) By saying that I'll fix it later I meant that I want to introduce function to modify tables and don't want to make temporary fixes now. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 19:47:08 +0000 : Souvent22 Thanks. yes, you're right. didn't know if that was universal across the board though since that'st he default, but someone could give their primary key constraint a diff. name. But, with your comment, I'll wait and let you take care of fixing my pgsql portion of my patch. Thanks for your comments though, really helpful...and not confusing. :). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 19:16:19 +0000 : Souvent22 Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/contact_full_1.patch (6.23 KB) Got the postgres correct this time. No temp table needed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:23:09 +0000 : Souvent22 Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/contact_full_2.patch (6.35 KB) patch re-roll due to head change. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:36:11 +0000 : chx Does this merit a DB change? what about passing md5(subject) instead? or is that too hackish? seems to be lot simpler to me... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 15:15:16 +0000 : m3avrck chx, md5() would work but that does seem a bit hackish ;) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 16:24:34 +0000 : Cvbge Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/drupal-head-contact-27140_0.diff (6.81 KB) It's case 'pgsql' not case "pg_sql" Also, I've noticed now that you use db_next_id(). First, the format is db_next_id('{tablename}_fieldname'), so in this case it should be db_next_id('{contact}_cid') Second, using db_next_id() with postgres needs a sequence defined. Also update path needs changes in case there are already some contacs in the table - the new column cid needs to be updated and sequences set. I've fixed this [for postgres] and attached new patch. I'm not sure how mysql behaves when adding a primary key and there is an existing data, buy you probably have to take care of it (if mysql allows you to add a column that is a primary key and allows it to have nulls then... well, I don't want to swear ;)) I've tested the code and it seems to run ok.

1 0

[drupal-devel] [task] Usability: Upload module needs a 'default' maxfile size setting
by Junyor 14 Sep '05

14 Sep '05

Issue status update for http://drupal.org/node/30025 Post a follow up: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/30025 Project: Drupal Version: cvs Component: upload.module Category: tasks Priority: normal Assigned to: Anonymous Reported by: m3avrck Updated by: Junyor Status: patch (ready to be committed) These changes have been merged into http://drupal.org/node/25756, though they can easily be separated if needed. Junyor Previous comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 30 Aug 2005 15:15:02 +0000 : m3avrck Problem: I've enabled upload.module I then later assign a few roles to be able to upload files. All of a sudden this new, hidden setting appears in Settings > Upload .. max file size and total file size for *each* role that has this capability. Hmm, good thing I decided to check back there! But where did those defaults come from, hmm. Fix: There should be a 'default' setting in Settings > Upload for max file size and total file size for *all* roles. Then, when I create a role and assign it upload permissions, it should inherit these defaults, which shouldn't be hardcode into Drupal anyways (as they are now). However, after I assign this permission, override settings should appear, as they currently do. Benefits: If I assign uploads to 20 different roles I can have default setting for them all instead of having to worry about changing them all. Also, this fixes the obviously usability problem and makes this module make more sense which is always a +1 :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 30 Aug 2005 15:20:59 +0000 : m3avrck Correction, there should also be a default setting for extensions as well. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:49:10 +0000 : m3avrck Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/upload.module_3.patch (3.29 KB) Ok I've created a patch which fixes this problem. Thorougly test here, please test and let me know! This certainly does simplify the out-of-box experience with the upload.module. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 30 Aug 2005 19:11:20 +0000 : m3avrck Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/upload.module_4.patch (3.54 KB) Fixed a small bug caught by mozillman in IRC. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 30 Aug 2005 20:01:49 +0000 : Souvent22 Tried patch. Seems to work ok. +1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 02 Sep 2005 15:30:06 +0000 : walkah +1 - perhaps i'm getting old and foggy - but isn't this how upload.module used to work?? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 02 Sep 2005 15:32:34 +0000 : Junyor There used to be a setting for max file size for the whole site, but I don't think these defaults were listed anywhere. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 02 Sep 2005 15:34:37 +0000 : m3avrck I think originally there was a setting similiar to this however I'm not sure if it was setting a 'Default' value or a 'Global' value for all uploads. I think that is what the originaly problem was for taking it out. This patch, coupled with my other patch: http://drupal.org/node/30038 (rerolled if/when Form API gets in) makes the administration of the upload settings page *very* easy and super clean and intuitive as well. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 12 Sep 2005 21:33:59 +0000 : m3avrck Bump for this simple usability fix!

1 0

[drupal-devel] [task] Improvments to Filter UI
by m3avrck 14 Sep '05

14 Sep '05

Issue status update for http://drupal.org/node/27364 Post a follow up: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/27364 Project: Drupal Version: cvs Component: filter.module Category: tasks Priority: normal Assigned to: Bèr Kessels Reported by: Bèr Kessels Updated by: m3avrck -Status: active +Status: patch (code needs work) Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter.module_10.patch (20.27 KB) Ok here's a new patch. Lot's of fixes in this one (all of the ones from above except the one noted below), including support for the new revisions patch. Additionally, 'input formats' has been renamed to 'input filters'. After debate on IRC, and the above comments in this post, it seems that 'input formats' is somewhat misleading and doesn't make sense. 'input filters' clears this up and makes sense to both native and non-native English speakers (as tested in IRC anywho ;)). This also makes more sense since Drupal refers to everything as 'filters' and not 'formats'. However, there is one issue still left unresolved: If you create a new input filter, and don't specify a title, page reloads clearing all filled in fields and prompts the error message. Additionally, a blank filter is created. Wanted to get this patch posted, I'll look at it later today but if someone can get this fixed easily, please do, thanks! m3avrck Previous comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:30:54 +0000 : Bèr Kessels This is a mockup for the Filter UI. Currently it is soo complex, that I dare to call it broken. Please comment on this, for I will not ake any patches, when the general idea is disliked. The idea is t split filters and input formats better. Filters are filters, defined in modules. Input formats are bundles of filters. This is how we have it ATM, but the interface fails to communicate that. I tried to develop a consistent (with the rest of Drupal) interfce that makes it clearer what is what. The menu is as follows: * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters ** ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:37:10 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_list1.png (16.34 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> see attachement 1 *** filters ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:39:02 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_add.png (23.42 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> see attachement 2, tab 2 *** filters ** Note: The default checkbox lmay seem a bit odd. But checking it will remove the "default status" from the current "default" one and make this one "default". The help text, and a drupal_set_message should explain this. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:40:08 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format.png (22.17 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> clicking a 'configure' link in the table of attachement 1 *** filters ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:40:55 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-filters_list.png (36.24 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters >> see attachement 4 ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:41:40 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit.png (22.63 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters >> clicking a 'configure' link in the table of attachement 4 ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 25 Jul 2005 14:46:27 +0000 : Bèr Kessels IMO this makes the interface easier. But other disagree. And because it also removes one feature: (being able to use E.g. HTML in different input formats, with different settings) I'll simply wont fix this :( ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:36:12 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy.patch (10.28 KB) I decided to go for it anyway. Be it in a slightly different way then my initial mockups. The difference is that I left the filters where they are, hidden beneath the formats. So, here is the patch that makes the filter UI more consistent with screens like blocs, menus, vocabularies et al also nice to note is that: 93 lines are added, 104 are removed. So netto we have less code :) (cvs diff filter.module | grep ^+ | wc -l) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:37:02 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_list_html.png (44.64 KB) Here is how the listing now looks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:37:57 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format_html.png (113.71 KB) And the "configure" screen. The 'add' screen looks exactly the same, only with the default values pre-filled. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:39:19 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format_too_long.png (121.82 KB) Oh, And here is a really nice example of why the current screen is no good. And here I "only" have four roles. I run a site with 12 roles, imagine this screen then! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:48:35 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_HEAD.patch (10.24 KB) And here is a pathc for HEAD (I forgot that I developed this on a 4.6.2 codebase. Sorry) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:55:25 +0000 : stefan nagtegaal I like this very, very much! This is - indeed - much better than the current UI. This always fits, and makes the life of people who use a fixed width theme much nicer.. Ber, FYI (you probably know this too), 'admin/access' does also break fixed width themes due to the fact that it expands the width of the table when more roles are being added.. Good catch! I like it much more this way.. +1 from me... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:27:34 +0000 : Dries The code style needs work (spaces, tabs, 'as' -> 'AS'), the code comments need work, and debug statements should be removed. Screenshots look good to me. db_query('UPDATE {filter_formats} SET cache = %d, name = \'%s\', roles = \'%s\' WHERE format = %d', (int)$cache, $name, $roles, $format); can be written better/shorter quote-wise. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:04:16 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_HEAD_0.patch (10.37 KB) Dries, thanks a lot for the review. OI fixed your comments. Or so I hope. code-style.pl was of no use (can that *please* be removed from core?) because it chokes on the help texts. It also pointed out a lot of old formatting isues, whic, when fixed wuold flood this patch with unrelated fixes. I tried to narow my style-searching to the areas I touched. And I made the comments more verbous. The query is fixed. it saves no characters, but looks better now. Thanks for the tip. The print_r..... blush. thats what I get for not running my default grep -r print_r on my code after finishing up... I could not find a lot of spaces and tabs. So it lmight be that i missed one. I triple checked it though. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:32:21 +0000 : Steven Moving the role settings inward does fix the wide-table problem, but it makes the filter configuration much more opaque. We could perhaps fix this by showing the roles as a comma-separate list in the input formats table. Such a list can wrap and will not stretch the table. Other than that: * Having the instructions for the Roles and Filters form_group() at the bottom is a bit weird. The distance is too big. * The table that was used for toggling filters on/off was much more compact before, and IMO a lot clearer. Why change to a flat list with the description staggered below each item? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:31:30 +0000 : Bèr Kessels consistancy, consistancy and more consistancy. There really is nothing worse that having a different 'concept' of UI for every thing in Drupal. We are going in the right direction, with the blocks being editable objects, menus acting like that, taxonomy, users, etc.. I wanted to make this act similar. I am not at all happy with the fact tah the list is still a form. But we need this, for setting the default. A big -1 for a comma-separate list. That is extremely hackish, even worse useabilitywise and just silly * we should avoid typing when not needed. * we should avoid errors on input, when they can be avoided (a typo is made very easy, I know all about it) Form set errors won't fix that usability -wise. I agree that you sort-of loose the overview. But IMO that is a minor loss comared to what we gain, usability-wise. The wtoo-wide was onlywhat triggered me. But do not think that I am noly making this patch to fix that issue. This patch is there to improve usability, through consistancy. o make drupal behave the same in most places in admin. If you know one screen, you know most of them. We really should move away from custom-hacks for every page, because that is useability rule #1: consistancy. Stadardisation, even if sometimes a custom hack might make things easier in that single case, it will reduce your overall usability so much that nearly ever it is worth that hack. That select-boxes instead of the table issue: consistancy. As well that it completely broke fluid CSS layouts, my solution is more consistant, and uses forms the way they are meant. If we cannot use $descritption in checkboxes they should be removed. but IMO it feels much more consistant. Tables are for tabular data, and this is simply a list of items, with additional data. And i do not really get what you mean with "too far down". Do you mean that you would like to see the order of the groups different? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 13:31:24 +0000 : Dries I haven't tested Ber's patch yet but looking at the screenshots, it like what I see. I remember being confused by the current filter UI, and often, I still am. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:53:26 +0000 : moshe weitzman I dislike the recent movement away from overview pages. I think we can still provide and overview while allowing editing to happen in a dedicated form. An example in the wrong direction is 'content types' admin. It is impossible to get an overview, and the listing page is worthless. I agree with Steven on this one. It is true that consistency is desirable. But consistent crap is not. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 20:02:39 +0000 : killes(a)www.drop.org I agree with Moshe. Getting a quick overview about what is set how is essential for an admin. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 30 Jul 2005 00:27:15 +0000 : Robrecht Jacques Overall I like the screenshots. Did not test the patch. Bèr, what I think Steven (#15) meant by "showing the roles as a comma-separate list in the input formats table" is that as an overview page it would be better if you added a list (not an input box!) to screenshot "input-formats_list1.png" (comment #1). Add a column that reads "Roles" (or "Enabled for") and then for each row a comma seperated list of the roles that can use this input format (or maybe even better a HTML list). You would still need to click "configure" to _change_ the roles. The "Default" text (not a radio button) you already show in the "Options" column is something similar: it immediately shows that this input format is the default without you having to go to the "configure" page. Why not do the same for "roles"? If this is what Steven meant, then I tend to agree with him. And to help moshe and killes: maybe you could even add a column that _lists_ the used input filters. Again, only a list, not a way to change it. That's what the "operations" column is for. A table like that will "fluid" better than what we have now, still it is a _complete_ overview of the settings. I could have misunderstand someone... I have the tendency to do that... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:21:32 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements.patch (14.52 KB) by popular demand: a comma separated list. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:24:31 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/format_now_contains_roles.png (22.09 KB) and a screenshot ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 18:39:44 +0000 : Dries Please check your use of print theme('page', $output). Normally, you just return $output. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:54:28 +0000 : Bèr Kessels All instances of theme('page',...) in filter.module are now changed to return ... ; furthermore, the patch is the same. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:04:02 +0000 : Uwe Hermann Bèr, I think you forgot to attach your updated patch. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:27:39 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements_2.patch (13.52 KB) my email client has this nice warning system for attachements. Maybe drupal should search for the word attachement too, and when no att. found give an error ;). Or maybe i should just learn to pay attention. Guess that is easier. Anyway, here it is. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 20:22:54 +0000 : Dries I wanted to apply this patch but: 1. I can't change the default input format. 'Save'-button doesn't work. 2. I got confused by the fact I can't change the roles of the default filter. I think the form group description should explain this. 3. form_group(t(filter)) should be form_group(t('filter'), ...). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 20:51:24 +0000 : m3avrck Found a few more issues: If I go into 'Configure' for 'PHP Code' and click the 'Configure' tab at the top and then click 'list filters' link in the text, I get this warning with PHP5 warning: Missing argument 1 for filter_admin_format() in \drupal\modules\filter.module on line 378. Also, it is sort of confusing as to what the 'List' tab implies. For example, if I click on 'input formats' in the admin menu, I get a list of the current filters. When I click 'configure' for one of those, I see the options for that filter. However, it says 'list' in one of the tab, which doesn't really mean much. I thought that was the list of filters, not the options for that filter. That should be cleaned up. Also, there is no way to get back to the full list of filters unless you click on 'input formats' in the admin menu. A setting/link to fix this would be great. Also, where is the link to add filters??? I think the options/layout/tabs should mimic of that of admin > users. So on admin > input formats, it has the tabs 'list', 'add format' ... very clear and consistent. On a configure page for a filter, it should have 'list', 'view', 'configure', 'rearrange' ... this would make it easier to navigate and get back to the original list of filters. Make sense? I think this and Dries' comments put this patch over the top :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 01:48:55 +0000 : tag In my initial battle to figure out this module's (quite nice) functionality, what tripped me up the most was actually the nomenclature. The way I keep it straight in my head now is to translate "input format" to "filter set". If you view those (the current) screens with this in mind, I think it's a lot easier to understand what's what. It sort of describes this in the help text, but the terms "filter" and "input format" don't really convey the relationship between the two -- there's no way to intuit that an "input format" is a collection of "filters". Not to my mind at least... and well, we know nobody reads instructions... Are there any technicalities that make renaming "input format" to "filter set" not accurate? Or does someone have a better term/terms to better show the relationship of these elements? (I'm aware of filters in servlet architectures but I don't think there's much of a collision with that usage). Anyhow, I guess this doesn't quite address the UI controls and/or layout, but would still help a lot. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 06:35:34 +0000 : Bèr Kessels I prefer filter set. In fact: I like it a lot. Anyone else ideas on this? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 10:18:18 +0000 : Dries I too had problems with the terminology; it took me months to get used to 'input formats' versus 'filters'. Using 'filter sets' might improve the situation -- especially from an administrator's point of view when you have to wrap your head around the UI/difference. I'm not native English, but 'filter set' sounds more explanatory, yet slightly more geeky so I'm not sure if it flies for users who don't need to understand the underlying concepts (eg. under the node and comment submission forms). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 11:00:05 +0000 : Bèr Kessels a heads up: I ma redoing the patch. But decided no to change the name yet. That is a too big change. IT should be in a separate issue, IMO. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 15:27:43 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_2.patch (13.57 KB) * Bugs as reported by dries fixed. * The [add] tab not appearing is due to your menu caching, refresh that please. * Fixed an additional bug: Some agents do not send TRUE for disabled checkboxen. Also in current filter admin. and people: we have a problem. Deleting a filter trows errors, due to the revisions changes. that happens in filter module now, but also after this patch. I have too little knowledge of the filter system to fix that, and IMO that is a separate issue. It should be fixed right after this patch is committed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 15:57:18 +0000 : Bèr Kessels FYI: the delete bug is waiting here: http://drupal.org/node/30781 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 18:18:17 +0000 : m3avrck Get this warning in PHP5: Warning: Missing argument 1 for filter_admin_format() in \modules\filter.module on line 379 I have traced this error back to line 240. Why are there no callback arguments like above on line 235? Looks like a source of a problem/bug here so needs to be addressed, not sure exactly how to fix it myself (otherwise I would). Should be easy it seems. Also, for a quick and easy usability improvement, on line 239, change t('list') to t('view') ... makes the menus less confusing. After those fixes, looks like this patch is ready to be committed :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 18:23:27 +0000 : m3avrck Also, this dialog is a bit confusing: "Choose which roles may use this filter format You are editing the default format. For the default format, all roles must be enabled. Therefore you cannot change them. " Maybe make it so that first line doesn't appear there on that page? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:35:50 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_2_0.patch (13.59 KB) changed that line of help. Can this please still be taken in consideration before the freeze? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 18:29:28 +0000 : m3avrck Can't apply patch, getting error: Patch malformed at line 287 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:10:07 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements_2_0.patch (14.19 KB) strange. the dowloaded one breaks too, yet the one i uploaded stll works. anyway, rerolled ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:25:25 +0000 : Dries IMO, the form function needs more work. You need to group the form construction and the form saving. Right now, when you don't provide a title, you are given an error and an emptied form. This may be a left-over from the original code though but it would be cool if you could tidy this up. The form_group() description still need a trailing point. There is a broken link in the following help text on the 'add input format'-page: /If you notice some filters are causing conflicts in the output, you can [rearrange] them./. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:30:12 +0000 : Bèr Kessels dont have time anymore. sorry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 20:50:34 +0000 : m3avrck new patch soon!

1 0

[drupal-devel] [bug] Using tabindex in user login form
by tostinni 13 Sep '05

13 Sep '05

Issue status update for http://drupal.org/node/29060 Post a follow up: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/29060 Project: Drupal Version: 4.6.0 Component: user.module Category: bug reports Priority: minor Assigned to: Anonymous Reported by: tostinni Updated by: tostinni Status: patch (code needs review) Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/user_tabindex.patch (1.75 KB) When the drupal module is activated, when you go to /user to log in, you have a link that appear to Drupal.org Enter your drupal username, or an ID from one of our affiliates: Drupal., so when you use "tab" to switch from one input to another, you go in order : - username input - Drupal link - password input So I think the logic is biased as you're supposed to reach first username, then password and end by the submit button. This patch add tabindex to input fields to force this behaviour. tostinni

5 5

[drupal-devel] [task] Improvments to Filter UI
by Dries 13 Sep '05

13 Sep '05

Issue status update for http://drupal.org/node/27364 Post a follow up: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/27364 Project: Drupal Version: cvs Component: filter.module Category: tasks Priority: normal Assigned to: Bèr Kessels Reported by: Bèr Kessels Updated by: Dries Status: patch (ready to be committed) IMO, the form function needs more work. You need to group the form construction and the form saving. Right now, when you don't provide a title, you are given an error and an emptied form. This may be a left-over from the original code though but it would be cool if you could tidy this up. The form_group() description still need a trailing point. There is a broken link in the following help text on the 'add input format'-page: /If you notice some filters are causing conflicts in the output, you can [rearrange] them./. Dries Previous comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:30:54 +0000 : Bèr Kessels This is a mockup for the Filter UI. Currently it is soo complex, that I dare to call it broken. Please comment on this, for I will not ake any patches, when the general idea is disliked. The idea is t split filters and input formats better. Filters are filters, defined in modules. Input formats are bundles of filters. This is how we have it ATM, but the interface fails to communicate that. I tried to develop a consistent (with the rest of Drupal) interfce that makes it clearer what is what. The menu is as follows: * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters ** ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:37:10 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_list1.png (16.34 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> see attachement 1 *** filters ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:39:02 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_add.png (23.42 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> see attachement 2, tab 2 *** filters ** Note: The default checkbox lmay seem a bit odd. But checking it will remove the "default status" from the current "default" one and make this one "default". The help text, and a drupal_set_message should explain this. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:40:08 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format.png (22.17 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats >> clicking a 'configure' link in the table of attachement 1 *** filters ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:40:55 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-filters_list.png (36.24 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters >> see attachement 4 ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:41:40 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit.png (22.63 KB) * administer ** .... ** settings *** input formats *** filters >> clicking a 'configure' link in the table of attachement 4 ** ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 25 Jul 2005 14:46:27 +0000 : Bèr Kessels IMO this makes the interface easier. But other disagree. And because it also removes one feature: (being able to use E.g. HTML in different input formats, with different settings) I'll simply wont fix this :( ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:36:12 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy.patch (10.28 KB) I decided to go for it anyway. Be it in a slightly different way then my initial mockups. The difference is that I left the filters where they are, hidden beneath the formats. So, here is the patch that makes the filter UI more consistent with screens like blocs, menus, vocabularies et al also nice to note is that: 93 lines are added, 104 are removed. So netto we have less code :) (cvs diff filter.module | grep ^+ | wc -l) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:37:02 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_list_html.png (44.64 KB) Here is how the listing now looks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:37:57 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format_html.png (113.71 KB) And the "configure" screen. The 'add' screen looks exactly the same, only with the default values pre-filled. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:39:19 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/input-formats_edit_format_too_long.png (121.82 KB) Oh, And here is a really nice example of why the current screen is no good. And here I "only" have four roles. I run a site with 12 roles, imagine this screen then! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:48:35 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_HEAD.patch (10.24 KB) And here is a pathc for HEAD (I forgot that I developed this on a 4.6.2 codebase. Sorry) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 13:55:25 +0000 : stefan nagtegaal I like this very, very much! This is - indeed - much better than the current UI. This always fits, and makes the life of people who use a fixed width theme much nicer.. Ber, FYI (you probably know this too), 'admin/access' does also break fixed width themes due to the fact that it expands the width of the table when more roles are being added.. Good catch! I like it much more this way.. +1 from me... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:27:34 +0000 : Dries The code style needs work (spaces, tabs, 'as' -> 'AS'), the code comments need work, and debug statements should be removed. Screenshots look good to me. db_query('UPDATE {filter_formats} SET cache = %d, name = \'%s\', roles = \'%s\' WHERE format = %d', (int)$cache, $name, $roles, $format); can be written better/shorter quote-wise. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:04:16 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_HEAD_0.patch (10.37 KB) Dries, thanks a lot for the review. OI fixed your comments. Or so I hope. code-style.pl was of no use (can that *please* be removed from core?) because it chokes on the help texts. It also pointed out a lot of old formatting isues, whic, when fixed wuold flood this patch with unrelated fixes. I tried to narow my style-searching to the areas I touched. And I made the comments more verbous. The query is fixed. it saves no characters, but looks better now. Thanks for the tip. The print_r..... blush. thats what I get for not running my default grep -r print_r on my code after finishing up... I could not find a lot of spaces and tabs. So it lmight be that i missed one. I triple checked it though. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 09:32:21 +0000 : Steven Moving the role settings inward does fix the wide-table problem, but it makes the filter configuration much more opaque. We could perhaps fix this by showing the roles as a comma-separate list in the input formats table. Such a list can wrap and will not stretch the table. Other than that: * Having the instructions for the Roles and Filters form_group() at the bottom is a bit weird. The distance is too big. * The table that was used for toggling filters on/off was much more compact before, and IMO a lot clearer. Why change to a flat list with the description staggered below each item? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:31:30 +0000 : Bèr Kessels consistancy, consistancy and more consistancy. There really is nothing worse that having a different 'concept' of UI for every thing in Drupal. We are going in the right direction, with the blocks being editable objects, menus acting like that, taxonomy, users, etc.. I wanted to make this act similar. I am not at all happy with the fact tah the list is still a form. But we need this, for setting the default. A big -1 for a comma-separate list. That is extremely hackish, even worse useabilitywise and just silly * we should avoid typing when not needed. * we should avoid errors on input, when they can be avoided (a typo is made very easy, I know all about it) Form set errors won't fix that usability -wise. I agree that you sort-of loose the overview. But IMO that is a minor loss comared to what we gain, usability-wise. The wtoo-wide was onlywhat triggered me. But do not think that I am noly making this patch to fix that issue. This patch is there to improve usability, through consistancy. o make drupal behave the same in most places in admin. If you know one screen, you know most of them. We really should move away from custom-hacks for every page, because that is useability rule #1: consistancy. Stadardisation, even if sometimes a custom hack might make things easier in that single case, it will reduce your overall usability so much that nearly ever it is worth that hack. That select-boxes instead of the table issue: consistancy. As well that it completely broke fluid CSS layouts, my solution is more consistant, and uses forms the way they are meant. If we cannot use $descritption in checkboxes they should be removed. but IMO it feels much more consistant. Tables are for tabular data, and this is simply a list of items, with additional data. And i do not really get what you mean with "too far down". Do you mean that you would like to see the order of the groups different? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 13:31:24 +0000 : Dries I haven't tested Ber's patch yet but looking at the screenshots, it like what I see. I remember being confused by the current filter UI, and often, I still am. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:53:26 +0000 : moshe weitzman I dislike the recent movement away from overview pages. I think we can still provide and overview while allowing editing to happen in a dedicated form. An example in the wrong direction is 'content types' admin. It is impossible to get an overview, and the listing page is worthless. I agree with Steven on this one. It is true that consistency is desirable. But consistent crap is not. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 20:02:39 +0000 : killes(a)www.drop.org I agree with Moshe. Getting a quick overview about what is set how is essential for an admin. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 30 Jul 2005 00:27:15 +0000 : Robrecht Jacques Overall I like the screenshots. Did not test the patch. Bèr, what I think Steven (#15) meant by "showing the roles as a comma-separate list in the input formats table" is that as an overview page it would be better if you added a list (not an input box!) to screenshot "input-formats_list1.png" (comment #1). Add a column that reads "Roles" (or "Enabled for") and then for each row a comma seperated list of the roles that can use this input format (or maybe even better a HTML list). You would still need to click "configure" to _change_ the roles. The "Default" text (not a radio button) you already show in the "Options" column is something similar: it immediately shows that this input format is the default without you having to go to the "configure" page. Why not do the same for "roles"? If this is what Steven meant, then I tend to agree with him. And to help moshe and killes: maybe you could even add a column that _lists_ the used input filters. Again, only a list, not a way to change it. That's what the "operations" column is for. A table like that will "fluid" better than what we have now, still it is a _complete_ overview of the settings. I could have misunderstand someone... I have the tendency to do that... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:21:32 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements.patch (14.52 KB) by popular demand: a comma separated list. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:24:31 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/format_now_contains_roles.png (22.09 KB) and a screenshot ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 22 Aug 2005 18:39:44 +0000 : Dries Please check your use of print theme('page', $output). Normally, you just return $output. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:54:28 +0000 : Bèr Kessels All instances of theme('page',...) in filter.module are now changed to return ... ; furthermore, the patch is the same. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:04:02 +0000 : Uwe Hermann Bèr, I think you forgot to attach your updated patch. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:27:39 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements_2.patch (13.52 KB) my email client has this nice warning system for attachements. Maybe drupal should search for the word attachement too, and when no att. found give an error ;). Or maybe i should just learn to pay attention. Guess that is easier. Anyway, here it is. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 20:22:54 +0000 : Dries I wanted to apply this patch but: 1. I can't change the default input format. 'Save'-button doesn't work. 2. I got confused by the fact I can't change the roles of the default filter. I think the form group description should explain this. 3. form_group(t(filter)) should be form_group(t('filter'), ...). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 08 Sep 2005 20:51:24 +0000 : m3avrck Found a few more issues: If I go into 'Configure' for 'PHP Code' and click the 'Configure' tab at the top and then click 'list filters' link in the text, I get this warning with PHP5 warning: Missing argument 1 for filter_admin_format() in \drupal\modules\filter.module on line 378. Also, it is sort of confusing as to what the 'List' tab implies. For example, if I click on 'input formats' in the admin menu, I get a list of the current filters. When I click 'configure' for one of those, I see the options for that filter. However, it says 'list' in one of the tab, which doesn't really mean much. I thought that was the list of filters, not the options for that filter. That should be cleaned up. Also, there is no way to get back to the full list of filters unless you click on 'input formats' in the admin menu. A setting/link to fix this would be great. Also, where is the link to add filters??? I think the options/layout/tabs should mimic of that of admin > users. So on admin > input formats, it has the tabs 'list', 'add format' ... very clear and consistent. On a configure page for a filter, it should have 'list', 'view', 'configure', 'rearrange' ... this would make it easier to navigate and get back to the original list of filters. Make sense? I think this and Dries' comments put this patch over the top :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 01:48:55 +0000 : tag In my initial battle to figure out this module's (quite nice) functionality, what tripped me up the most was actually the nomenclature. The way I keep it straight in my head now is to translate "input format" to "filter set". If you view those (the current) screens with this in mind, I think it's a lot easier to understand what's what. It sort of describes this in the help text, but the terms "filter" and "input format" don't really convey the relationship between the two -- there's no way to intuit that an "input format" is a collection of "filters". Not to my mind at least... and well, we know nobody reads instructions... Are there any technicalities that make renaming "input format" to "filter set" not accurate? Or does someone have a better term/terms to better show the relationship of these elements? (I'm aware of filters in servlet architectures but I don't think there's much of a collision with that usage). Anyhow, I guess this doesn't quite address the UI controls and/or layout, but would still help a lot. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 06:35:34 +0000 : Bèr Kessels I prefer filter set. In fact: I like it a lot. Anyone else ideas on this? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 10:18:18 +0000 : Dries I too had problems with the terminology; it took me months to get used to 'input formats' versus 'filters'. Using 'filter sets' might improve the situation -- especially from an administrator's point of view when you have to wrap your head around the UI/difference. I'm not native English, but 'filter set' sounds more explanatory, yet slightly more geeky so I'm not sure if it flies for users who don't need to understand the underlying concepts (eg. under the node and comment submission forms). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 11:00:05 +0000 : Bèr Kessels a heads up: I ma redoing the patch. But decided no to change the name yet. That is a too big change. IT should be in a separate issue, IMO. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 15:27:43 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_2.patch (13.57 KB) * Bugs as reported by dries fixed. * The [add] tab not appearing is due to your menu caching, refresh that please. * Fixed an additional bug: Some agents do not send TRUE for disabled checkboxen. Also in current filter admin. and people: we have a problem. Deleting a filter trows errors, due to the revisions changes. that happens in filter module now, but also after this patch. I have too little knowledge of the filter system to fix that, and IMO that is a separate issue. It should be fixed right after this patch is committed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 15:57:18 +0000 : Bèr Kessels FYI: the delete bug is waiting here: http://drupal.org/node/30781 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 18:18:17 +0000 : m3avrck Get this warning in PHP5: Warning: Missing argument 1 for filter_admin_format() in \modules\filter.module on line 379 I have traced this error back to line 240. Why are there no callback arguments like above on line 235? Looks like a source of a problem/bug here so needs to be addressed, not sure exactly how to fix it myself (otherwise I would). Should be easy it seems. Also, for a quick and easy usability improvement, on line 239, change t('list') to t('view') ... makes the menus less confusing. After those fixes, looks like this patch is ready to be committed :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 09 Sep 2005 18:23:27 +0000 : m3avrck Also, this dialog is a bit confusing: "Choose which roles may use this filter format You are editing the default format. For the default format, all roles must be enabled. Therefore you cannot change them. " Maybe make it so that first line doesn't appear there on that page? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:35:50 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_module_UI_consistancy_2_0.patch (13.59 KB) changed that line of help. Can this please still be taken in consideration before the freeze? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 18:29:28 +0000 : m3avrck Can't apply patch, getting error: Patch malformed at line 287 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 19:10:07 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/filter_interface_improvements_2_0.patch (14.19 KB) strange. the dowloaded one breaks too, yet the one i uploaded stll works. anyway, rerolled

1 0

[drupal-devel] [feature] add inline functionaliy to uploads
by Bèr Kessels 13 Sep '05

13 Sep '05

Issue status update for http://drupal.org/node/26288 Post a follow up: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/26288 Project: Drupal Version: cvs Component: upload.module Category: feature requests Priority: normal Assigned to: Anonymous Reported by: Bèr Kessels Updated by: Bèr Kessels Status: patch (code needs review) Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/upload_inline_2_5.patch (8.66 KB) last attempt Bèr Kessels Previous comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 03 Jul 2005 18:03:35 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/upload_inline.patch (19.05 KB) One of the most often asked features is proper inlnie handling of files. Look at the amount of solutions, the popularity of image_assist, and the amount of peolpe dowloading image.module! That alone should be enough proof that Drupal lacks proper inline image support. This patch adds that to core. In fact, it does little more then appending a link of img tag to the body or the teaser. Off course that is configurable per file. Next to the [] list checkbox, this patch adds an [] inline checkbox. Simplicity is the foundation of this patch. I want no stles for inline editing, no fancy html wrappers, no tokens, just $node->body or teaser appended with a small html string. Another small themable funtion is introduced, (hey, you cannot expect me to develop something without adding more power for themers, now, can you? ;) ), that allows people to theme the string that is appended to the body or the teaser. Oh, and also note hat the biggest part of this patch is some cleaning I had to do in order to be able to develop properly. I dont like Ifs inside cases in foreaches inside swiches. in other words: nodeapi now calls functions instead of executing code directly. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 03 Jul 2005 18:19:25 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/inline.patch.screenshot.png (26.68 KB) here is how the form now looks ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 03 Jul 2005 18:19:58 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/inline.patch.screenshot3.png (30.53 KB) and this is an example of inlined images and a .doc file. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 03 Jul 2005 20:44:00 +0000 : sepeck changing to patch per request from berkes ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 05 Jul 2005 07:46:13 +0000 : Kobus This gets a +1 from me in principle, however, the [inline:xx] tag with inline.module gives you greater freedom as to where the inline image must be displayed. If you can add this functionality (I haven't checked the code, I don't know if it is in there) it would be a great addition for Core. This same strategy can be used for inline blocks, I am sure. Regards, Kobus ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 05 Jul 2005 08:57:50 +0000 : Bèr Kessels there are a couple of reasons why i did not include the [inline] tags. * I aimed for extreme simplicity: a checkbox shows an image inline: its up to the theme where it appears (if one does not like it before/above the body and teaser.). Simplicity was the main goal. * We don't have any tokens in core. And we should not have them. * Tokens are a very bad substitute for a good interface. They give less power then plain HTLM. Are much worst documented then HTML, but in the mean time, they are still as hard to learn as HTML. (Yes, I know people _think_ they are easier, but there _is_ not difference between [ ] and , only that its a different ascii char. So, no. I don't allow any placement of the image. I leave that that for dedicated modules, or the themer to decide. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 05 Jul 2005 09:34:06 +0000 : Kobus So you will provide an API to do this? For example, with perhaps minor modifications, the inline.module will be able to display these files? In that case I am happy. If not, then I can't give my support to this patch (as if that matters...). A themer can't do this task as inline images (and blocks for that matter) is too dynamic for theming; it can be placed anywhere in a node where the user pleases. This means for me that there should be a module for this, such as inline module that allows you to define [inline:xx] tags. If your module emits an array of uploaded files (such as upload.module), inline.module can be, with minor changes, adapted to show these files inline. To show you what I mean with the content is too dynamic for a themer to perform this task, look at this screenshot related to inline blocks (inline images can follow the same pattern): http://drupal.org/files/issues/regions---possibility-3.png ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 05 Jul 2005 11:26:15 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Kobus, We are dealing with different issues here: You want a method to place images, files or so anywhere in the post. That is fine, but certainly NOT addressed in the patch! I made patch that *only* adds marked files to the body. its really nothing more then <?php $node->body = $filestring . $node->body ?> No APIS, no, dynamic tokens, no filters, nothing. However, what I meant with themers, is that there now is a theme_upload_inline available, so you can theme the abovementioned $filestring. On top of that $node->files[FILEID]->inline is TRUE if a file is flagged for inline. So in node.tpl.php, or wherever you want to theme a node, you can print nice images inline, when that flag is set. And about the comment that a themer cant do this: Simply not true. On most sites images are always placed in the same places. REally, even the sites see which use img_assist or inline, use them to place the images on the exact same places in every node. People /think/ they want the power to place images anywhere, but they hardly ever use that power. Just look at all the big news/publishing sites out there (BBC, CNN, BoigBoing, r even freshmeat) images are all placed acc. to the theme. They are not placed in random places by authors. So if you are one of the few that still want that power, there aer mots of power tools like inline module or img_assist. We should offer a good default, one that is simple. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 05 Jul 2005 11:41:34 +0000 : Gerhard Killesreiter I fully agree that tags are evil. Kobus: You can always look for tags in $node->body in your theme's node function. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 05 Jul 2005 11:50:52 +0000 : stefan nagtegaal Ber, the theme-function in your code looks like: <?php +/** + * Theme function for rendering of inline images + * @param $file a file object. + * @param $image a Boolean, indicating whether an img tag (TRUE) or an anchor tag (FALSE) should be used. + * @ingroup themable + */ +function theme_upload_inline($file, $image) { + if ($image) { + return '<img src="'. check_url(($file->fid ? file_create_url($file->filepath) : url(file_create_filename($file->filename, file_create_path())))) .'" alt="'. check_plain($file->filename) .'" class="upload inline">'; + } + else { + return ''. check_plain($file->filename) .' [1]'; + } + +} ?> After looking at your code it's not clear to me when $image is TRUE or FALSE, can you elaborate on me please? [1] http://drupal.org/'. check_url(($file->fid ? file_create_url($file->filepath) : url(file_create_filename($file->filename, file_create_path())))) .'\" class=\"upload inline ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 05 Jul 2005 12:06:39 +0000 : Bèr Kessels The function calling the theme function should decide whether its an image. IMO that is far too hardcore code for a themer ;) <?php $image = ereg('^(image/)', $file->filemime); ?> inside _upload_inline() does the trick. I did find one issue, though, with svgs, which are image/svg so maybe we should limit this to really only inline jpg, png, and gif, by extension? But I am no fan of determining files by extension, and IMO getimgsize is too heavy; ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 05 Jul 2005 12:13:52 +0000 : stefan nagtegaal Can't you make use of PHP's <?php image_type_to_mime_type(); ?> or <?php image_type_to_extension(); ?> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 05 Jul 2005 12:45:43 +0000 : Kobus Well, if not in the patch, I need inline functionality one way or another. inline.module works perfectly with the current upload.module to fulfill my needs, and if there is a way where someone can extend your proposed upload.module, that would get my +1, otherwise I will just remain neutral about this issue. inline.module makes use of $node->files and displays that image. If your patch still uses $node->files, then this is a non-issue. In other words, if I can, with inline.module, or with minor modifications to inline.module still show files inline, I am +1 for this. As for the themability question... I still disagree. You say "Simply not true. On most sites images are always placed in the same places." That is ONLY true because they have NO alternatives. Means the content is in the same places, because they have no other places to put them. I have made tens of static sites where the content does not resemble a fixed pattern or structure. For me, free-flow layout is my expression of my creativity. This is why I still even BOTHER with static sites; when Drupal don't do what I want it to do. If Drupal could do inline display of content properly, I'd never even build another static site. It is a great mistake people make (including myself), and that is they design the site before ANY content is available, and this happens a lot in static sites. But in dynamic sites, you have far less control over this, unless you have a VERY clean structure with limited information that can be added, and only a few people posting content. If you can have your content before you start the design, you will have a better fit. I can't see how you can anticipate every possible posting posted on your site if you have a diversity of users. Especially not if you're using a site such as an designer's showcase site where your creativity is shown by your web sites. Possible, but not easy. If I claim that I have "unique, fresh designs" I can certainly NOT give them a "box-like" site with "left and right side bars only". That's why I need inline content, this includes images AND boxes. Gerhard: Your concern about tags is answered as well above, if I am not mistaken. The patch need not provide the tags, but should provide for someone to develop a module that provide the filters or tags. To summarize: I don't need your patch to do the inline images. I just need your patch to be able to allow someone else to develop a module that can display inline files. Kobus ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 18 Jul 2005 09:56:38 +0000 : Bèr Kessels okay, so for all clarity, let me sumarise: * this patch introduces a chackbox "inline". If checked, the file will show up inline. IT will be appended to the teaser and the body. * this patch does *not* allow one to place images of files in a userdefined place in the body. * this patch does *not* do any resizing nor any thumbnailing. * This patch is meant to be simple, clear and transparant. No tokens, no javascript, no nothing. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 18 Jul 2005 11:21:54 +0000 : Kobus Then I can't see how this patch could replace the existing upload.module, which allows you to use inline.module to place images inline. I therefore withdraw my +1 and go -1 on this (not that it matters, I believe). I think you didn't properly read my previous message. I said I don't need your patch to do all this, but I can't live without the functionality currently provided by the upload.module and inline.module combination. I agree that your patch don't need to have that functionality, but if your patch takes away this functionality, in other words, I can't (by hook or by crook) manage what I need to do, my vote is -1. Regards, Kobus ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 18 Jul 2005 19:58:34 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Kobus, And all the others looking fofr advanced inline systems: please do not -1 this. It will hep inline module a lot too. allthough not yet in this patch, but can you imagine a perission system for inline module, that comes for free? Or a core system, that makes inline module ten times smaller? it is this path! so, please, if it is not /exactly/ what you are looking for, at least look at the advantages for Joe Average, and even for the possibilties for your favorite inline-module. even imag_assist will gain an anomous usability impcact when usiong this module, for it can then finally use the upload module in full scale. Ber ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 23 Jul 2005 18:59:10 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Sohodjo jim: " I hope it matters. A big -1 on enforcing over-simplification at the expense of important and existing functionality. If automatic, uncontrollable placement of images becomes the standard, it will mean fewer not more image-rich Drupal sites as site owners/developers get complaints about "Why can't I control my images!" I _strongly_ encourage Ber to provide a "have it both ways" solution. Why not have an admin configuration setting for "allow inline tags" with default off. Change it to on and you get an additional upload checkbox for 'inline at tag' to accommodate the current functionality of the inline module while simultaneously allowing for default placement. " NOOO. people; please; look at the PATCH. Again: and hopefully last time: Simplicity. This patch does NOT replace ANYTHING inline module or img_assist wants to do. This patch hands better data to such modules. It hands a variable over to these modules, $node->file[FID]->inline, which tells these sorts of modules if people wnat that file to appear inline. AND it CAN (by default will) render a file in the most simple way inline. So really, if you want to -1 this patch, fine. But do not -1 it, because it does too little IYO. It still allows MUCH more than what you can do no, without that patch! And any solution, for core, that allows advanced handling of inline images will either require an enourmous amount of work, or it will simply no get in. So, unless you come up with a good core-worthy patch, this is still a big leap forward from what we have now. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 23 Jul 2005 19:01:51 +0000 : Bèr Kessels :$ this is an attempt to fix the borken HML in the previous follow up. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 04:07:34 +0000 : TDobes Please don't combine unrelated changes together in the same patch. Moving stuff in/out of the _nodeapi hook has absolutely nothing to do with the patch and makes it much harder to read through the patch and see what it's actually doing. I'd appreciate it if you could separate the changes made here which are really relevant and move the other changes into another issue. Also: You change form_group_collapsible(t('File attachments') to form_group_collapsible(t('File Attachments'). A quick glance at some other core code seems to indicate that we've standardized on capitalizing only the first word in multi-word group titles. As for the functionality itself, I don't think this belongs in upload.module. It would be useful to have the functionality in core, but as a separate module which can be switched on and off. (upload_inline.module or something like that) If a site were set up using an inlining system from contrib and the functionality you're proposing could not be switched off, it would be extremely confusing to users that there are two different ways of inlining images. A minor comment: I'm not so sure whether the results of this patch, when inlining non-image attachments, will be the one users expect. A non-web-savvy person may expect his/her Word document (for instance) to appear inline with the node when they click "inline" -- just like their images do. I'd suggest that we limit inlining to images only. I'm not as adamant about this as the other issues, so I could be convinced otherwise if others disagree. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sun, 24 Jul 2005 07:58:19 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Thank you for your thoughts Tdobbes. As for the "moving things in and out of nodeapi" This was necessary, because otherwise the patch would have made the code even more unreadable. I agree with you on this point, but I simply had to clean it up a little, in order to be able to work in it. As it stands now, it is simply not possible to make this a separate module. We cannot hook into the files table. In a next stage, I might work out some hook for that table. But first things first. Can Dries or Steven please comment on his. I want to know If i should bother spending this enormous amount of time on commenting and debating this issue. If the chances are small this is accepted, Ill just drop it This ridiculous long thread reminds me again why I try to avoid making patches for core. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 25 Jul 2005 05:49:37 +0000 : Steven Overall I like the concept, but I think it at least needs some default styling to make the image appear okay, like floating it. Right now it appears inline between whatever was there... very ugly. Sure you can say "leave it up to the themer" but if the goal is to provide a simple default, we can't expect people to dive into theming if they are going to use this feature instead of img_assist or whatever. Also, I wonder about the classes "upload" and "image". Is there a reason to use two classes? Isn't "image" a bit too generic? Oh and there is a missing XHTML / for the img tag. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 25 Jul 2005 12:42:26 +0000 : Bèr Kessels I will fix the broken Xhttml. I chose "image" because it is exactly the same as the .image class used by image.module. But I will see to it, to add more functionality. I agree that it is not up to the themer for some good defaults, thus I will add a line of CSS to drupal.css (*shiver* ;) ) upload, IMO does not communicate well enough what the Image is doing. Not sure yet how I ill fix this, but I will see to it to come up with a better CSS/theme solution. Thanks! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:18:23 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/upload_inline_0.patch (12.24 KB) Suggestions by Steven are now included. I very simple float is added to the inline images in drupal.css. XHTML fixed. And I cleaned up some old crufty comments, as suggested by Dries. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 26 Jul 2005 17:05:45 +0000 : fax8 What is proposed here is a good idea. But I think that this is done in not good way. I think that upload.module should be only a layer between file system and modules. So modify upload module to add a specific feature like your inline for me is not good. but I like the idea to add checkboxes for enable interaction modules between modules and upload.module. Maybe we could design an of api wich let modules tell upload.module that they can interact with it. I make an example: I'm a developer of video.module. Now to add a video file to video.module one need to put the file into drupal folders using ftp and then insert the path to the file during node creation. One of the features our users are asking a lot is the possibility to directly upload a video file to dupal. So I should write a lot of code, settings, security buggy code.. that for me isn't useful. What about if only calling an upload.module api I should enable a new checkbox on upload form called "use as video file" which let me use the file as a video file on my module??? What do you think about it???? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:00:03 +0000 : Bèr Kessels fax: upload /is/ such a layer. Just look at how image module does it. You need not write any additional 'buggy' code, you can use all teh upload functionality. The upload interface (the table and list), however, is tightly integrated, so that drupal offers an out-of-the-box file system. Nox, my patch simply adds an "out of the box" inline functionality. Small and simple. For any more advanced file features you should use or write a module that, in turn, uses the uplaod.module. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:22:40 +0000 : stefan nagtegaal After discussing with Ber, I think this patch has some great potential though the simplicity of it.. For the people who don't completely agree what this patch does: - It adds an extra checkbox for each attachment. If the 'Inline' checkbox is checked, images are displayed inline in your post and other attachments (like .pdf, .ppt, or whatever) were transformed into links. The potential of this patch is in the fact that this makes it much, much easier to have another contrib module which makes it possible to let you choose at the node submission how you would like your node to be displayed, incl. the selected inline attachments to be displayed (using _nodeapi()). So, a big +1 from me on this.. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:27:52 +0000 : Kobus > - It adds an extra checkbox for each attachment. If the 'Inline' > checkbox is checked, images are displayed inline in your post and other > attachments (like .pdf, .ppt, or whatever) were transformed into links. Does this mean it is done automatically or do I have control over this? I don't want the images to be inline if I can't control where I put it. Let me just clarify my position on this short-and-sweet-like: If it breaks the existing functionality that upload.module + inline.module provides without opening the door for a replacement, then I am -1, otherwise +1. :-) Kobus ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:51:50 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Kobus: Again: it does not break anything! It opens up enormous potential for modules such as inline/module. Because inline module now has access to a variable $node->files[fid]->inline. in other words: modules such as inline.module can now find out what images a user wants to see inline! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:59:53 +0000 : Kobus Ber: Great, then I +1 it. From our previous talks about this, it seemed as if this functionality was being taken away. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:18:21 +0000 : Sohodojo Jim Agreed, +1. The most on-going and especially most recent discussion has clarified that we can have our simple cake and contrib mod cake as well. Does this mean that inline module will work as is, or will a post-patch update be required? --Sohodojo Jim-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:33:47 +0000 : Bèr Kessels inline module will continue working. but in order for it to use this inline variable (and become even better) it needs to be patched. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 18:12:09 +0000 : moshe weitzman I read through the code and it looks good to me, though it is hard to know whats new given all the code thats moved around. this is definately needed functionality. If you were still up for enhancements, I'd like to see the 'inline' box get checked by default when uploading an image. when the attachment is not an image, the box should be disabled and unchecked. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 18:32:40 +0000 : Bèr Kessels disabling the box for non-images would break the link function (i.e add a link in the text. But, on second thought: that is fine, since it defeats the list checkbox. I will add that. As well as making it checked by default. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:54:14 +0000 : Junyor @Bèr: Why not simplify this patch to only add the hooks to a contrib module would need to add this functionality? You said that your patch would allow inline.module to work much more easily. But then there is a lot of extra stuff there that inline.module won't need. This functionality can't replace inline.module, so anything that it doesn't use just gets in the way. I'm afraid that users will think this is the best Drupal can provide without looking for a contrib module. I'd prefer we spent our time and effort adding the whole functionality of inline.module or making it easy to add and position inline content in nodes to core rather than adding some functionality to upload.module that doesn't cut it for most users. So, either strip this patch of everything but the functionality that inline.module (and similar modules) can use or allow me to position images in my text through this patch. Otherwise, -1. If this is the first step in a plan to add the functionality I want to core, I'd like to hear your full plan. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:19:37 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/upload_inline_1.patch (19.71 KB) to all: everyone has Big Plans[tm] and even worse: everyone has Bigger Plans for my patch, for inline module. Why not code it? Hooks? fine! module integration, even better. Sorry if I sound a bit grumpy here. But so far I have spent nearly three times as much hours debbating the patch, then I spent creating it. Hooks sound great. but are not the intention of this patch. I want to add a *default* way, that works. But that does not break other modules, nd in fact tries to help them. But I am not inventing some advanced image handling system here. Here is an updated patch with renewed updates.inc (got lost in the previous patch) Moshes suggestion about disabling non-images-checkboxes is also implemented. I like it a lot more now. I did not, however, implement Moshes idea about defaulting to "checked". for a few reasons: * It looks a bit silly if you have more then one image inline, And defaulting all uploads to inline will inline any uploaded image. * When uploading large images they will default to inline, thus pushing your sites layout to oblivian * None of the other options default to TRUE, so for consistancy I prefer to default it to not inline. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:24:26 +0000 : Bèr Kessels oh, bytheway: you can test adn play with this patch here: http://fixme.remixreading.org/?q=add_content note that it is a sandbox, so your account will get lost, and pages might not work :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 03:47:35 +0000 : ejort +1 from me for this feature. It's frustrating that core doesn't include some basic image display functionality, and this will cover a large percentage of users needs without introducing complexity. People wanting arbitrary image placement still have inline.module etc., so it's nothing but an improvement on the current situation. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 29 Jul 2005 06:38:46 +0000 : Steven Bèr: one thing is not clear to me... you are right that other modules can access the inline value. But upload.module will always add the image to the body. So, how can other modules use the inline checkbox/option meaningfully? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 02 Aug 2005 18:33:30 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Steven: what I mean, is that they have access to a variable that tells them a user wants something inline. Nothing more. Its up to these modules to use that meaningfully. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:26:36 +0000 : Bèr Kessels The patch still applies. Dries, please let me know if I must bother trying to get this in before 4.7? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:30:09 +0000 : m3avrck Ber, check this latest commit: http://drupal.org/node/28483 ... I think your patch no longer applies since this JS based does do inline functionality. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 01 Sep 2005 19:46:35 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/upload_inline_2.patch (20.02 KB) updated patch works with revisions and JS upload. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 01 Sep 2005 20:32:11 +0000 : m3avrck got an extra 'favico' in the patch file there. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:47:24 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/upload_inline_2_0.patch (19.22 KB) favicon removed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 01 Sep 2005 23:06:11 +0000 : killes(a)www.drop.org I think I'd like to have this feature in core. The patch is quite big, though. ;-/ Also I noticed that the pgsql part is bogus. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thu, 01 Sep 2005 23:27:42 +0000 : Bèr Kessels how would the pgsql look then? I am a complete pgSQL nitwit :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 02 Sep 2005 15:18:47 +0000 : telex4 Just a quick +1 from a user who is hoping that this gets into core for 4.7. We're using the inline functionality on our Remix Reading test site at the moment, and it's very handy for our theme where the user uploads any number of files and may want one or two images to be previewed in the node. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 02 Sep 2005 17:26:49 +0000 : m3avrck Patch needs to be rerolled. Latest 2_0 version does indeed fix JS-based uploads commit, however it is missing all of the database changes and updates from the last _1 patch. Also, upload_count_size() is undefined, should be using upload_space_used() [2] instead. Also, beginning of upload.module patch adds the default maxsize setting which was previously taken out becuase it wasnt working properly. This patch [3] corrects that and is a seperate issue :) [2] http://drupaldocs.org/api/head/function/upload_space_used [3] http://drupal.org/node/30025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 02 Sep 2005 18:31:12 +0000 : Steven Bèr: I'm afraid you missed my point. It is pretty useless for other modules to be able to read the inline value, when upload.module always adds the image to the node body. Suppose I want to make a module which adds more advanced inline positioning, perhaps with a marker tag. I cannot avoid _upload_inline($node) being called, so I have to somehow remove that (themed!) image tag again. This makes the "other modules can use it" argument pretty silly IMO. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 02 Sep 2005 18:48:32 +0000 : Dries It would make sense for Ber to provide one or two examples of how this could be used. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fri, 02 Sep 2005 21:02:39 +0000 : Bèr Kessels @Steven: no I did not miss your point. on nodeapi view this is appended to the $node->body, regardless. You are correct. But nothing witholds you from using that variable *before* the view is invoked. ou can then choose to unset the variable, or leave it. I first had yet another hook, that would be called on nodeapi view, by the upload, on a per-file base; but then I found that all this was very OTT, since it ca all be achieved with the existing nodeapi. I reverted to the nodeapi. @Dries; examples, sure. 1) Look for the result at http://fixme.remixreading.org/node/595, the small image at the right is rendered with this variable. 5and I must add that users that tested this behaviour were VERY positive!) In phptemplate, the node, we do: <?php foreach ($node->files as $file): ?> <?php if ($file->inline): ?> <div id="preview"> <img src="files/<?php print $file->filename ?>" alt="preview" title="preview of <?php print $node->title ?>" /> </div> <?php endif; ?> <?php endforeach; ?> Because we have ourtheme_upload_inline() to return NULL, this looks like you see online. Together with some CSS you get a very nice result. 2) For most weblogs, or newssites, you need not do anything, for the $node->body has the image already appended *if* the inline checkbox is checked. Esp since these types of sites need a unified look, they do not (or should not) need to alter the place and aligning of each image. 3) For the power users there are node-layout tools available such as tinyMCE, wikisyntax or even inline.module. Since that last one is the simplest I use that as example. <?php function inline_nodeapi(&$node, $op, $arg) { if(is_array($node->files) && $op == 'view') { //on view we replace the tokens with the img tags $node->teaser = _inline_substitute_tags($node, 'teaser'); $node->body = _inline_substitute_tags($node, 'body'); } elseif(is_array($node->files) && $op == 'validate') { $node = _inline_remove_tags($node); //remove the tags that are not flagged as inline } elseif(is_array($node->files) && $op == 'load') { _inline_remove_flags($node) //remove all $node->files[XX]->inline variables, so that upload does not render them. } elseif(is_array($node->files) && $op == 'from pre') { $node = _inline_add_tags($node); //add [inline:X] tokens to 'body', so editor can use them. $node = _inline_remove_tags($node); //remove [inline] tokens that call files that are (no longer) marked for inline use. } } //.... function _inline_add_tags(&$node, $field) { foreach ($node->files as $file) { if ($file->inline && !_inline_check_for_tag($file->filename)) { //look if the tag is not already in body, and if the file is marked for inline usage. $node->body = _inline_add_single_tag($file) . $node->body; //Actually add the token to the beginning of the body $node->teaser = _inline_add_single_tag($file) . $node->teaser; // same for teaser } } } ?> //note. preview is broken no Idea how this post looks ;) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 03 Sep 2005 04:37:23 +0000 : TDobes Bèr: The idea of clearing $node->inline never occurred to me... but won't that only work some of the time? It depends on the order in which modules' _nodeapi hooks get called. I believe they get called alphebetically (there's an asort in module_list), so a module whose name starts with v, w, x, y, or z will not be able to prevent upload.module from displaying its inline image. While I do feel this functionality is useful, I think a better way of implementing it would be to allow other modules to add columns to the upload table. Then a module could invoke this upload hook to add a field for "display inline" and invoke _nodeapi to actually place the image. This would provide for future expansion of the upload module in addition to solving the immediate goal. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 03 Sep 2005 06:37:17 +0000 : Bèr Kessels in short my battle plan was: * introduce inline stuff * introduce hook for altering the file table Why i did not go for #2 at once? because IMO you can do two things wit a file: show it, or download it. Anything else should be done in a file admin UI. And furthermore: yes modules are ran in alphabetic order, but, nodeapi(load) is ALWAYS ran before nodeapi(view). So you can always make sure on nodeapi(view) the variable is unset. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 03 Sep 2005 12:22:00 +0000 : moshe weitzman I think that Ber's suggestion to unset the variable is a great, simple workaround. I don't see any more outstanding objections to the patch. Yes, it can be improved later, but it is useful already. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sat, 03 Sep 2005 13:08:05 +0000 : Bèr Kessels the patch is still in brokenish state. I am trying to free some time this weekend (sunday evening) to fix it and synch with HEAd again. not h revisions and JS upload broke this patch. Its a lot of work to reroll, due to that amount of changes (nearly a complete rewrite, I am afraid) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:48:47 +0000 : Bèr Kessels please review. This a complete rewrite, * I ignored all the huge fucntions and just left tath for another ime to clean up (never). It does make the patch easier to read and smaller, though * I left the 'upload preview' bug for what it is: it belons in a differnt issue, and would clutter this inline feature patch a lot. For the rest see above. * Themes could be updated to do nice stuff to the inline patch. I did not do that, for that goes far beyond what this patch tries to do ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:49:57 +0000 : Bèr Kessels Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/upload_inline_2_4.patch (14.13 KB) No, please review /this/ patch. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tue, 13 Sep 2005 18:35:55 +0000 : m3avrck upload.module is listed twice in the patch ... so patch isn't work, please update!

1 0