This is good as long as it's obviously documented and signaled to the user. Basically, no one should be caught unaware of what keyboard shortcuts are active at any given time. So there needs to be an indicator. As the shortcuts already require JS to work we could go a little further and make it an icon with a label. Expand a (popover?) menu of explanation onClick or onHover. If they're disabled, strike the text and add a red "No" symbol over the icon (It's important to also signal that they're NOT available; this is why the icon should still exist).
I suggested tooltips on hover explaining the shortcuts a while ago in issue #524. Albert said he fixed it, so we just need to wait for it to be live.
I suggested tooltips on hover explaining the shortcuts a while ago in issue #524. Albert said he fixed it, so we just need to wait for it to be live.
That's a good start, but as I said, I recommend taking it further. Keeping users aware and informed by making sure status information is in easy view is fairly fundamental. That's why I emphasised the independent indicator and its behaviour.
I don't think that 3-5 page sequences that don't even have names should all get their own pool.
They should get their own pool (and even 2 page sequences as well in my opinion). It's not too hard to make up a name for if there isn't one, and it's preferable to navigate compared to parent/child connections (which are supposed to be used for similar posts, not sequences) or comments.
I admit defeat, S1eth, I am unable to counter that by means other than (ridiculous) propositions to change (ie. no display of pools while editing, but that reeks of "bad idea" to start with and I myself just can't see that happening). Though I still would rather have them at the bottom.
(The "Rating", "Parent" and "Source" fields in the edit form also require twice as much space as they need. They should be merged into single lines (no display:block). And I wish "Submit" were where the "Related Tags" button currently is)
They indeed should. Feel free to post a github issue regarding this.
Not sold on not having the old parent:child relationship abilities any longer but only because I suspect we'll get swamped with tiny pools.
Like Wypatroszony I also thing moving the pool navigation to the bottom is one of the best things the site has done. It's also easier when browsing the site from phone or tablet.
First of all, being used to something ≠ that something being the best solution. I, for one, don't quite understand how pools at the top helped with navigation in them. Well, it did, if you were content with viewing 25-80% of it. With how they are at the bottom, you view an image/read the page as a whole and proceed to the next without any unnecessary scrolling/clicking/whatever, which did happen earlier.
I also believe, that placing pools at the bottom is one of the best things that happened to this site after it's entire change, even though I'm very used to them being placed at the top.
Edit: Why is that a relevant knowledge before actually getting to know what the content is?
If that's really a "must have" thing, then maybe "This post is in n pools" at the top would help?
In part it let me quickly advance through images in a pool without having to go to the bottom of the page as sometimes I go to a pool midway through and thumb forwards to the present point as I realize I clicked in too early. Considering I run full size by default and certain pools run quite large images mashing space to get to Next Page when I mistakenly jumped to the wrong one is a pain. At least with top list I can hit home key and pop up there. And with those large image pools there tends to be dozens of comments so I can't just hit the end key and get to the pool navigation
Relevant knowledge ALWAYS useful so I know its an actual pool to go to. I know you're dead set on shooting down ANY criticism of this.
Honestly with 90% of the horrible decisions changed to the old style which was actually fixing a problem which didn't need to exist we're stuck with this one.
Having the little corner button was fine but going to bottom only just makes the site more clumsily looking as its honestly they chose a horrid font and style for presenting it. I also dislike the fact that you have the "Search Term" down there as well which is also an eyesore.
I don't get why we have to change things that work. I mean is it that much of a fetish in the modern world that we need pointless UI changes with every upgrade (I'm looking at you Windows 8)
I strongly agree with Serlo and S1eth that the current pools should be splitted into either collections or sequences. Collection pools should be nestled into right side bar, while sequence pools can be returned to the top.
I also think changing collection pools into a new color of tag isn't a bad idea. Collections don't even need to be ordered, which is the main use of pools.
Quick aside: I still think the current forum and pool index pages look a little like an exec spreadsheet. Quicksearch back and "tighter" list please. Oh and the little outline bar between all the lines really isn't doing the page any favours.
S1eth said:
You may read the page and spoil yourself, because you didn't know there were pages before it. If I open an image, I want to know if it's part of a comic before I read it. I may also want to immediately go back 1 page to assure that I didn't miss any pages since I last checked the pool.
Note that I cannot do that by pressing the LEFT/RIGHT arrow keys since they default to my search query, not the pool.
Furthermore, when editing tags for a larger image, the bars for both the pool and tag query obscure too much of the screen's space, resulting in the need to scroll up repeatedly to find more items to tag.
The bar on top was never a problem until you have an image that is in 2+ pools. We should instead try to split the pool system so that a post can only be in 1 of them. The "collection" pools can then be listed near the tags again.
I'm persuaded. The spoilers point is too important to ignore, but my OP points are still valid, so we have to deal with the heart of this problem.
One pool per post. An image can't be part of 2 comics. Use pool descriptions and parent/child posts to handle exceptions.
Collections and subjective pools abolished. This started when tags became objective; they all should either have been given their own tag category or been abolished completely.
Pool bar back at the top, not sure what to do about the tag search thing, though.
The parent/child system either needs a new "heir/successor" post, so that multiple child posts can be distinguished or all sequential comics need to be pools.
I would like the pool bar to be a little smaller (not the text, just the bar) and the parent/child info needs to go down the side. The vertical space is too valuable; opening many tabs needs the image to be "in-focus" by default, which the auto-reduce feature helps with wonderfully, but the others would help. Also a little more space between the image and the ads could be welcome, but this bullet point is all my opinions.
Wypatroszony said: First of all, being used to something ≠ that something being the best solution.
If we are stating the obvious things, then let me add that something new ≠ something better.
I, for one, don't quite understand how pools at the top helped with navigation in them. Well, it did, if you were content with viewing 25-80% of it.
Excuse me, are you trying to say that you're always watching 100% of every picture you've opened before deciding if it's worth of your attention or not? Really?
As for myself, I'll give you a simple example. 1. I'm browsing "Disgustingly Adorable" pool:903 2. I'm not into Touhou. I hardly know the universe and I've never been into it. Simply - not interested.
And before you suggest using pool:903 -touhou query, I'd like to add that it's the same with pokemon. And... many others. Which I don't even remember now, but I'll certainly do if I only see part of the screen. Not to mention that from technical point of view it would be query browsing then, not a pool.
Only 25% of picture? Sometimes 10% it's more than enough to discard it and move along. Especially if I read the copyright tag. Which is at the top left part of the screen, btw.
BTW, I've asked for link to the previous requests/discussions about this change at this forum. Should I assume there were none of it, and this change was never discussed - it was only, most probably, personal request to albert which he complied by without any discussion about this? Not that I'd suprised by that. Not at all.
Excuse me, are you trying to say that you're always watching 100% of every picture you've opened before deciding if it's worth of your attention or not? Really?
When I am browsing pools, yes, 100% of every picture in 100% of pools I browse. Because I only browse comic pools, and not collection pools.
If you want to browse collections like disgustingly adorable, you don't need to do it in the pool's order. Just use a pool:903 search. You can tell just by the thumbnails which ones to click and which not to.
Excuse me, are you trying to say that you're always watching 100% of every picture you've opened before deciding if it's worth of your attention or not? Really?
Well, that's kind of my job here, whether it's pools or not.
I admit defeat, S1eth, I am unable to counter that by means other than (ridiculous) propositions to change (ie. no display of pools while editing, but that reeks of "bad idea" to start with and I myself just can't see that happening). Though I still would rather have them at the bottom.
But what stops us from moving tag edit form right under the picture, above the pools? Heck, technically, while 'edit' link is below the image, the form itself can be moved above the image, or even in draggable semi-transparent box much like current notes, or wherever. Edit form usability is a separate issue and I see that as an invalid argument.
As for spoilers... pools positioned above image raised different problem, 'warning' you about the contents of every image. Seriously, I'd rather discover that image is 'heart-warming' or 'soul-crushingly depressing' myself, while reading it, not before reading it. Especially so for long, story-heavy strips.
And I doubt arguing like that will get us anywhere. Opinions are just split between 'above picture' and 'below picture' - it's a matter of user preference and hence begs for option in user profile. As well as some other things. Now, while danbooru is still undergoing renovations and is unstable, may be the best time to suggest some UI tweaks and configurable options. While RoR and proper MVC make danbooru modular by design, user options are typically pain in the ass for developer and have less chances to be implemented when things get stable.
Type-kun said: As for spoilers... pools positioned above image raised different problem, 'warning' you about the contents of every image. Seriously, I'd rather discover that image is 'heart-warming' or 'soul-crushingly depressing' myself, while reading it, not before reading it. Especially so for long, story-heavy strips.
*Nods*
I will say that the one thing I do agree with the top faction on is that it is nice to know if a image is part of a pool - or to be more specific, if a story image or comic is part of a story telling pool - before I read it.
Either way you are going to be taking some good with some bad
If we make the collection pools into the fourth form of tagging (e.g 'Collection') with their own colour, they can be put under the general tags at sidebar. That is hidden enough and won't spoil anything unless you actively read them. Actual pools should only be reserved for sequences/comics, whose titles should be put at the top to inform the reader right away.
In practice, pools are only different than tags because of their utility to order posts. Thus it makes sense to use them only for images that need ordering.
If we make the collection pools into the fourth form of tagging (e.g 'Collection') with their own colour, they can be put under the general tags at sidebar. That is hidden enough and won't spoil anything unless you actively read them. Actual pools should only be reserved for sequences/comics, whose titles should be put at the top to inform the reader right away.
In practice, pools are only different than tags because of their utility to order posts. Thus it makes sense to use them only for images that need ordering.
Yeah, I like that idea. I still like having the pool bar at the bottom of course but moving collections to a tag system would a lot cleaner no matter where you put pool navigation.
Currently, pools have a lot of debate surrounding them. Some want the bar at the top so they can skip through the comic quickly with the mouse, others want it at the bottom so they don't have to scroll back up with the mouse. Some hate the pool bars cluttering up the top of the page, others hate them cluttering up the bottom of the page. Some pool titles spoil the comic when they're at the top, but sometimes reading the comic before seeing it isn't the 1st page spoils the comic.
There's a solution to all 3 of these complaints. Put the bar at the top and bottom and adding mouse controls satisfies the browsing. Adding the option to hide the bar and only displaying one bar at a time solves the clutter. Nuking the collections pools and stricter controls on pool names solves the spoilers problem both directly and by letting the pool name be at the top.
But that last point is so important, I started a new thread. I think fixing it should help the parent/child post issue too. forum #9071
If we make the collection pools into the fourth form of tagging (e.g 'Collection') with their own colour, they can be put under the general tags at sidebar. That is hidden enough and won't spoil anything unless you actively read them. Actual pools should only be reserved for sequences/comics, whose titles should be put at the top to inform the reader right away.
In practice, pools are only different than tags because of their utility to order posts. Thus it makes sense to use them only for images that need ordering.
I think making collection pools into tags will arise additional discontent from users, much worse than we have now. Also, how would we deal with pools like pool #1193 then? Is it a collection or a story, considering Zun at the end?
Though I agree that dividing pools into 'collections' and 'stories' is a huge step to finding a compromise between what we are discussing, we risk to clutter the interface too much by doing that, so it needs further planning. Also that's serious additional work for mods, considering there is 6000+ pools by now.
Be conservative. If it has an "end" and/or a "start" of some sort, it's a pool. Things like pool #1868 stay pools. They're not strictly ordered, but they're not going to be part of another comic series. And for really grey areas, there's always parent/child posts.
If you would expect the whole pool to all to be published in one book 20 years ago, then it stays a pool.
