Re: [LogiLogi-list] Commited changes, logis-box working IE

> >     maybe the div here too
> >   </span>
> > </span>
> >
> > The 3d argument is the place where the ajax-call should go to fill up
> > the drop-down span/div.
> >
> > The 4rd argument, and 'link16' span-id refer to this link being the
> > 16th link-cluster in the Logi currently being shown, as this will be
> > always unique, while LogiLogiLink does not need to be (word could be
> > occurring twice with different links behind it....)
> >
> Ok, this is the poing where server side mixs with client side. I
> suggest to make the most in Server Side and print it plain, so there
> will be less work for javascript (supose 30 logilogilinks in a page),

That's true but it's a lot less neat, and most users have over-
powered computers anyway, while our server will have quite a hard life
due to the complexity of Manta, and the in-efficiency in terms of
performance, of Ruby.

But ok. It's no top priority.

> and also non-javascript browsers will still be able to work.

This last one is a good argument, although then of course we would
have to make sure that it works in non-Javascript-browsers...

> We will work on this and commit the code. I hope we can work on the
> textile part too.

You can if you want, and of course if Miguel agrees to co-operate 
closely on this with you...

> I'd like to fully understand the working, the future ideas, and really
> understan the flow of LogiLogiManta, and then I'd like to work on the
> UI as a whole, but now I'll just stick to your design. I'm telling
> this becouse while trying to test some 3columns layout I found that
> there were things that should change for this to work, and when one
> concept changes, it makes many other to change too, and then it will
> take too much time, and I really don't know at the moment if any
> change is for better, as I didn't see the current UI workin (in
> Manta).

The UI of the old version of LogiLogi (www.logilogi.org) works as a
largely div- based 3-column-layout with a footer that sticks to the
bottom if pages are smaller than the screen-size, and is quite 
similar to the new one (at least it works in my browser).

Still tables play an important role in it, actually they do the trick,
but it has problems too (scaling doesn't work well). Still we need to
decide whether there is a better solution, or whether we should accept
the usage of a table for now.

(it is also optimized for search-engines by putting the real content
at the top of the page, but since google got smarter this is not
needed anymore, i've heard from people in the Search Engine
Optimalization field...)

> > No, happily enough not, that would be horrible.
> >
> > You will enter:
> >
> > Hello "LogiLogi":botanics/george_bush;!
> >
> OOOOkk.. Sorry I got confused. Now this is much more like a Wiki link
> (but with much more knowledge/logi behind it ;)

;-)

> > Note that Rails has beautifull functions for calling through AJAX (like
> > link_to_remote), so you don't need to re-invent the wheel on this,
> > although we cannot use it right-away because it combines link-generation
> > and adding the Javascript for the AJAX-call.
> >
> Ok, I'll have to re-read this many times, then the mantadocs, then
> read this again, then some more ruby, then read this again, and then I
> might understand it better. Thanks for the explanations, but I just
> don't know enough Ruby/Textile/Javascript/LogiLogi to get a clear line
> of the process step by step, but I'll get there soon.

Ok.

> > Also the GPL v3 will come out in it's final version soon, maybe even
> > just before Manta goes live.
>
> Yes! I was talking about the same you said. I was talking about the
> release of the GPLv3. When it's released you could use just GPL as the
> licence, but GPLv3 will be the same. I also see you've been around
> licenses and probably know more about it than I do.

'k Then we agree ;-)

> > > Also, Manta should be in the Savanna as a GNU project when it's
> > > released. Don't you think? I could work on that too if you think so,
> > > but with time.
> >
> > I don't think it is necessary because we are already on both
> > Sourceforge and RubyForge, which offer simmilar services.
> >
> > Of course we might move there simply because GNU is closer to the core
> > of Free Software, or because their services are better, but as far as
> > I can find it they don't provide Subversion at the moment.
>
> You are right. I should have said "could" in stead of "should".
> There also is the http://directory.fsf.org/

We definitely want to try to get in there, and we're already on 
Freshmeat too.

friendly greetings,

Wybo

(managed to answer to this one too, before the lecture)