Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization

Note: We are moving the topics of this forum and it will be deleted at some point

Publish your own request for comments/change or patches for the next version of phpBB. Discuss the contributions and proposals of others. Upcoming releases are 3.2/Rhea and 3.3.
User avatar
Erik Frèrejean
Registered User
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: surfnet
Contact:

Re: Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization

Post by Erik Frèrejean »

VSE+ wrote:Switching to HTML5 is so stupidly easy and simple, it really should be done.
At what advantage? Just to change it so we can claim "it's buzzing along with the HTML5 buzz", if phpBB starts to use HTML5 specific code the change obvious makes sense, but changing the doctype of an existing style to claim HTML5 without actually using anything from HTML5 is IMHO just to lift on the hype and doesn't actually contribute anything.
Available on .com
Support Toolkit developer
User avatar
hanakin
Front-End Dev Team Lead
Front-End Dev Team Lead
Posts: 941
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 9:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization

Post by hanakin »

I Agree and the change to the header you mentioned is planned as it does not effect any of the browsers, in fact there are several minor changes which I think I mentioned earlier on in this discussion which have no bearing on browsers.
Donations welcome via Paypal Image
User avatar
VSE
Extension Customisations
Extension Customisations
Posts: 674
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:18 am

Re: Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization

Post by VSE »

Erik Frèrejean wrote:
VSE+ wrote:Switching to HTML5 is so stupidly easy and simple, it really should be done.
At what advantage?
A savings of 161 bytes of useless text per page!! :mrgreen:

Actually, the only reason to change it now, would be to commit to it for the future. But I was really only just trying to point out how little it takes to make the "switch"

I do suggest you take a look at this: http://diveintohtml5.org/semantics.html
You'll see that the change I mentioned is less about switching to HTML5 and more just about dropping code that is no longer needed - vestiges of a past where browsers and sites had to worry about things like "quirks" and "standards" modes (the HTML5 doctype triggers "standards" mode in ALL browsers), and other crap.

But you will also be surprised to notice that whether you like it or not - even in its current state, Prosilver is already techinically valid HTML5 code!!!! So there! :lol:
Has an irascible disposition.
User avatar
DavidIQ
Customisations Team Leader
Customisations Team Leader
Posts: 1862
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:29 pm
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization

Post by DavidIQ »

Wouldn't that change make older browsers identify the page as HTML 4.0?
Image
User avatar
hanakin
Front-End Dev Team Lead
Front-End Dev Team Lead
Posts: 941
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 9:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization

Post by hanakin »

DavidIQ wrote:Wouldn't that change make older browsers identify the page as HTML 4.0?
here is a video explaining some of these http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/html- ... right-now/

you are correct it simply allows the browser to choose however this has no bearing on the rendering if you start of with it when you go through the various browsers for compatibility via css you will still end up with the same result
Donations welcome via Paypal Image
/a3
Registered User
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 6:44 am

Re: Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization

Post by /a3 »

VSE+ wrote:
Erik Frèrejean wrote:
VSE+ wrote:Switching to HTML5 is so stupidly easy and simple, it really should be done.
At what advantage?
A savings of 161 bytes of useless text per page!! :mrgreen:
At a cost of removing the document type declaration. :roll:

For HTML5, I guess this is acceptable. I don't agree with the decision of removing the DOCTYPE information for XHTML5 though. XHTML5 is an application of XML, so it should contain information on what tags the parser needs to expect. For HTML5 this doesn't matter, since HTML5 is no longer an application of SGML.

(rant over - sorry if this was slightly off topic)
$ git commit -m "YOLO"
User avatar
VSE
Extension Customisations
Extension Customisations
Posts: 674
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:18 am

Re: Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization

Post by VSE »

The following is just a simple change - and it should apply both to Prosilver and to phpBB.com's websites as well!

phpBB uses a clever little trick to prevent browser "jumping" when browsing between pages that do and don't fill the page (a short page loses its scroll bar, so the content appears to jump a little to the right)

in css phpBB uses:

Code: Select all

html {
    height: 101%;
}
I actually came across a better method to achieve this in a more elegant way. In the following method, there is no "bogus" scrollbar created on short pages to prevent the bump. Instead, the browser adds an empty scrollbar - without the scrolling/slider part. So it looks more like it should! Afterall, if there is no content below on a short page, why present a scroll bar?

Code: Select all

html {
    overflow-y: scroll;
}
This works in all browsers too, including the dreaded IE6!

http://css-tricks.com/349-eliminate-jum ... croll-bar/
Has an irascible disposition.
User avatar
Oyabun1
Former Team Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 9:48 am

Re: Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization

Post by Oyabun1 »

hanakin wrote:
  • All the javascript contained in the theme will be converted to jquery essential simplify & condensing it as well as removing all inline bad semantic onclick, onchange etc.. functions
Coming to this discussion late, but just wondering why jQquery was chosen as the JavaScript framework to be used? jQuery is certainly popular at the moment, but is it the most efficient and compact and does it do everything required?

It just seems that jQuery has been selected before any analysis has been done on all the current JavaScript functions, and any proposed functions. Maybe jQuery can do it all, but maybe midori, Dojo, MooTools or one of the numerous other Javascript frameworks or libraries would be better. Deciding which is most suitable would also require consideration of any proposed AJAX functionality that may be intended.

In terms of packaging, perhaps the JavaScript framework, any necessary extensions and any unique phpBB JavaScript files could be contained in a separate directory within the styles directory, but one separate to individual styles. Just seems redundant for every style to have its own JavaScript directory when it is likely, as now, that the vast majority will contain exactly the same files.
User avatar
hanakin
Front-End Dev Team Lead
Front-End Dev Team Lead
Posts: 941
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 9:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization

Post by hanakin »

From my understanding it will all be self contained and compatible with any framework you choose to use. The choice of Jquery was infact a long one. read here -> viewtopic.php?f=108&t=33747 for more on this. This thread is more of an over all branching one for all the changes to achieve a better version of prosilver.

However personal experience Jquery is simple, powerful, and has more documentation than any other framework I have come across.
Donations welcome via Paypal Image
User avatar
VSE
Extension Customisations
Extension Customisations
Posts: 674
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:18 am

Re: Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization

Post by VSE »

Also of note: There are plenty of MODs using jQuery for phpBB by now. I haven't seen any that use Motools, Dojo or any others.
Has an irascible disposition.
Post Reply