Could everyone please not change the title to the threads? There are
now several Twitter and a couple 'entry cut collapse/expand' threads
going and they are the same topics.


I don't mind, but the thread police might.

Thanks,
Okwari

On 4/16/09, Emily Ravenwood <[email protected]> wrote:
> *nods*  My guess would be that it re-renders the page completely,
> fetching the entirety of each entry via the permalink and then sets
> the expand-collapse div from the first cut detected onward.  To do
> that natively would not (theoretically) be hugely difficult but it
> would probably be pretty involved. And then you'd have the reload-or-
> be-inaccessible issue when changing the state of each cut container.
>
> Additional issue to add, then, while I'm thinking of it:  How do
> screenreaders and similar handle "collapsed" text?  Can the script be
> adjusted to give some other flag or cue that this content can/should
> be skippable, totally aside from the visual jiggery-pokery being
> done?  If these can be handled separately, then using Ajax (no
> reload) may become a lot more feasible.
>
> --ER
>
> On Apr 16, 2009, at 2:14 PM, Paul-Gabriel Wiener wrote:
>
>> From what I can tell, it loads the whole entry from the beginning
>> of the cut to the end of the post, in a frame. (It can't tell where
>> the end of the cut is, so you just get everything.)
>>
>> Aileen wrote:
>>> Now I want to ask the lj_addons guy how it works, because it does
>>> exist and it is pretty nifty.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Emily Ravenwood
>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     *wry*  That's way beyond the scope of what I know how to do, and
>>>     would almost certainly require some serious re-writing of the
>>> basic
>>>     lj-cut function.
>>>
>>>     The content "under" a cut is not collapsed, it's completely
>>> replaced
>>>     with a link.  Clicking on the link takes you to the version of
>>> the
>>>     entry that does not replace the cut text.  Turning that into
>>>     something expand-and-collapse-able strikes me as a pretty
>>> serious re-
>>>     build of the function.
>>>
>>>     --ER
>>>
>>>     On Apr 16, 2009, at 1:58 PM, Paul-Gabriel Wiener wrote:
>>>
>>>     > Click to collapse would be pretty cool. But, while you're at
>>> it...
>>>     > mentioned before, but it'd be cool to have an expand/collapse
>>>     > button on all cuts. It's my favorite LJ_addons feature, but
>>> it'd be
>>>     > awesome if it was built in to DW.
>>>     >
>>>     > Emily Ravenwood wrote:
>>>     >> All right, let's see about this, then.  The basic "click
>>> here to
>>>     >> collapse" function is extremely simple.  I'd be willing to
>>> write
>>>     >> it  up, or, more precisely, paste one of the versions I use
>>>     >> elsewhere and  edit it.  The two difficult parts with
>>> implementing
>>>     >> this are:
>>>     >>
>>>     >> 1) Making it persistent, which I don't know how to do, off the
>>>     >> cuff.   Does anyone happen to have the cookie-checking
>>> script this
>>>     >> would need  lying around?
>>>     >>
>>>     >> 2) This is generally either a Javascript or an Ajax thing.
>>>     >> Journal  themes do not permit those, because of the
>>> security risk
>>>     >> inherent,  something I can't see changing any time soon.
>>> So this
>>>     >> bit of code  would have to be added into the Core.  Does the
>>>     >> Styles team think  this is a possibility, supposing the script
>>>     >> itself is put together  and offered?
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Associated issue:
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Javascript or Ajax?  Javascript means each collapse would
>>> reload
>>>     >> the  whole page, which could be both unwieldy and possibly
>>>     >> prohibitive in  bandwidth depending on how the reading page is
>>>     >> getting called.  Ajax,  however, is on the "not accessibility
>>>     >> friendly" list, and using that  would limit who can
>>> actually use
>>>     >> this function.  Can someone who  deals with the site load say
>>>     >> whether using Javascript is a deal  breaker?  And can the
>>> people
>>>     >> who would likely use this say whether a  reload for every
>>> collapse
>>>     >> would be too much trouble for the pay-off?
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Cheers,
>>>     >> ER
>>>     >> _______________________________________________
>>>     >> dw-discuss mailing list
>>>     >> [email protected]
>>>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>     >> http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-
>>> discuss
>>>     >>
>>>     >>
>>>     >
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     dw-discuss mailing list
>>>     [email protected]
>>>     <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>     http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dw-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
dw-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss

Reply via email to