LDraw.org Discussion Forums
PT Mockup - Printable Version

+- LDraw.org Discussion Forums (https://forums.ldraw.org)
+-- Forum: Administrative (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Website Suggestions/Requests/Discussion (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-23.html)
+--- Thread: PT Mockup (/thread-23460.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8


RE: PT Mockup - Orion Pobursky - 2019-06-18

(2019-06-18, 20:01)Steffen Wrote: I also like the new look a lot.
I have some minor improvement suggestions, but they can wait.

Here is one that I would like to ask right now:
can we modify the text that is displayed for a part as heading
- for the required files
- for its parent files?

Currently, the PT displays the texts
- "Required (unofficial) subfiles:" and
- "Related (unofficial) subfiles:"

, and both do not make sense. I would like to see that changed to:
- "Required Files:"
- "Parent Files:"

The reasoning is this:
1. nowadays, not all required files are "subparts" anymore. For example, for aliases, the required file is a normal part. See 55707c as example. So the wording "subfiles" for the required files is wrong IMHO.
2. the addition "(unofficial)" is completely unnecessary, because only such files are displayed. Official ones are not shown on the PT as dependency. The word only adds clutter.
3. for parent files, the wording "subfiles" makes no sense at all, it never did. We all just got used to the ever same text on the PT pages.

Im not sure about "Parent". Any other suggestion?

Since I'm curious, PM me you other minor suggestions.


RE: PT Mockup - Magnus Forsberg - 2019-06-18

(2019-06-17, 19:33)Orion Pobursky Wrote: We are now live.

The pages feels longer, I need to scroll more.

I like that some words have been emphasized.
Could we have the same on the words "a new version" of the file was submitted ?


RE: PT Mockup - Orion Pobursky - 2019-06-18

(2019-06-18, 21:08)Magnus Forsberg Wrote: The pages feels longer, I need to scroll more.

I like that some words have been emphasized.
Could we have the same on the words "a new version" of the file was submitted ?

They are a bit longer. There’s more whitespace for one. Not a lot more but it’s there. Also the fonts are a bit bigger as well. Third, the actual page is constrained to a smaller small. Again, not hugely small except for the largest of monitors. All in all I think it’s a small price to pay to be able to use the tracker on mobile and to have modern markup that is unified across the PT and main site.


RE: PT Mockup - Damien Roux - 2019-06-19

(2019-06-05, 16:38)Orion Pobursky Wrote: I’ve started a mock-up of the theming for the PT:
http://www.ldraw.org/pt-detail-mockup.html

This is a static page (i.e it won’t change based on votes, etc.)
I chose this one because the link in the comments is breaking my formatting.

I’d like feedback from the regular PT users.

On Firefox, the history graph is too large and I can't see the right part of it (it is out of the screen) and I got no way to scroll horizontally.


RE: PT Mockup - Orion Pobursky - 2019-06-19

(2019-06-19, 22:35)Damien Roux Wrote: On Firefox, the history graph is too large and I can't see the right part of it (it is out of the screen) and I got no way to scroll horizontally.

Yah. I noted that above. It’s the last major error I need to fix. Should prolly have that done in a few days. The rest of the work is finding and fixing errors on mobile and updating old markup.