You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@roller.apache.org by Matt Raible <mr...@gmail.com> on 2005/11/29 03:23:43 UTC
No way to navigate back in 2.0
One of the features I liked in Roller 1.x was a link at the bottom of
a page that linked page a page to previous posts. This seems to be
missing from Roller 2.0 - why?
Matt
Re: No way to navigate back in 2.0
Posted by Dave Johnson <da...@rollerweblogger.org>.
On Nov 29, 2005, at 5:58 PM, Allen Gilliland wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 12:50, Dave Johnson wrote:
>> On Nov 29, 2005, at 2:15 PM, Allen Gilliland wrote:
>>> 1. the next/previous links don't work properly for permalinks.
>>> previous works, but next always goes to the most recent entry.
>>
>> That's how it should work on a single entry page.
>
> really? why should the "next" link always go to the most recent
> entry? shouldn't it link to the next chronological entry?
Oops. I read that wrong. You are correct.
- Dave
Re: No way to navigate back in 2.0
Posted by Allen Gilliland <Al...@Sun.COM>.
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 17:22, Rahul Jain wrote:
> > I think you could certainly argue that we should provide some way for bloggers to have a page that shows XX entries in a row starting at entry YY, but when do people really want that functionality?
> >
>
> The "Front Page" and "Group Blogs" are the two cases where we may need
> pagination. Most other pages, there seems to be only a small chance of
> some individual posting more than 15 entries in a day.
I'm not sure that I believe group blogs versus individual blogs really
has anything to do with it. But you make a good point that any blog
that ends up with a lot of entries on a single day presents a more
interesting challenge in how it is displayed.
However, I would disagree that the "Front Page" of a blog should allow
for pagification. I believe the main page of a blog is only meant to
provide a blog snapshot and simply display the last XX most recent
entries from that blog. If someone wants to go beyond those XX entries
then they need to access that blogs archives, where we would allow for
pagification. It's a somewhat subtle distinction between front page and
archives, which a casual user may not even notice, but i think it's
important to how we organize the data into pages.
-- Allen
>
> I can see a group blog that could potentially have more than 15
> entries in a day, and users may want to get to them to follow the
> discussion.
>
> It will be nice to see a link "prev page" and "next page" which could
> show the next page worth of entries.
>
> For the "Front Page", my two cents, it will be nice to show all the
> entries for the day. For a popular blog site, this can be large and
> hence again we need to display them one page at at time.
Re: No way to navigate back in 2.0
Posted by Rahul Jain <da...@gmail.com>.
> I think you could certainly argue that we should provide some way for bloggers to have a page that shows XX entries in a row starting at entry YY, but when do people really want that functionality?
>
The "Front Page" and "Group Blogs" are the two cases where we may need
pagination. Most other pages, there seems to be only a small chance of
some individual posting more than 15 entries in a day.
I can see a group blog that could potentially have more than 15
entries in a day, and users may want to get to them to follow the
discussion.
It will be nice to see a link "prev page" and "next page" which could
show the next page worth of entries.
For the "Front Page", my two cents, it will be nice to show all the
entries for the day. For a popular blog site, this can be large and
hence again we need to display them one page at at time.
Re: No way to navigate back in 2.0
Posted by Allen Gilliland <Al...@Sun.COM>.
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 12:50, Dave Johnson wrote:
> On Nov 29, 2005, at 2:15 PM, Allen Gilliland wrote:
> > gotcha. definitely seems like something we should continue to have.
>
> Yep, we need some way to page back in time.
>
>
> > i will admit though, that i think our weblog entry pagification is a
> > bit quirky and messed up. i don't use it, so it doesn't bother me
> > much, but i know of 2 things that i've noted in the past.
> >
> > 1. the next/previous links don't work properly for permalinks.
> > previous works, but next always goes to the most recent entry.
>
> That's how it should work on a single entry page.
really? why should the "next" link always go to the most recent entry? shouldn't it link to the next chronological entry?
i.e. if I have 3 blog posts on 10/12/05 and I am looking at the permalink for the second entry posted on that day, then I would expect the "previous" link to point to the first entry from that day, and the "next" link to point to the last entry from that day. right now that doesn't happen.
>
>
> > 2. a date based archive like /page/20050920 shows a full page of
> > entries rather than just the entries from that day. why?
>
> That's how Roller has always worked, and it's wrong. It causes cache
> duplication and it can even prevent people from viewing entries. For
> example, let's say you have 50 posts on one day, but you're blog is
> configured to show only the most recent 15 entries. You miss entries 16
> through 50.
>
>
> > it seems to me that we should support all 3 date based urls, /2005,
> > /200509, /20050920, and each should be limited to the scope of the
> > date presented. i.e. if someone just puts the year then they will
> > only see entries for that year, same for month, same for day.
>
> We should definitely support single-entry, day, month and year views.
> For the year and month views, we might want to get creative and show a
> calendar rather than a bandwidth-busting big page of entries.
I agree that we don't want to just dump 300 entries onto a single page for the year 2005, but we should think a bit more about the calendar idea. The nice thing about showing a calendar is that essentially we would be forcing people to use either permalinks or a single day archive which would cut down on the number of rendered pages we have. The drawback is that some people will want to have a monthly archive which just lists entries from that month starting from the beginning and possibly requiring multiple pages if there are too many entries for one page.
Another consideration is category based archives. We have the same problem when someone could potentially have 200 entries marked in one category, how do we display that category based archive? We can't use day or permalink archives for that.
>
> But the main page of a blog should display some number of days recent
> posts, with the option of displaying them grouped by day.
>
> So, if we provide access to month, day and year views, do we really
> need a way to page back in time in chunks of X entries at a time? I
> like that features, but it causes weblog entries to be duplicated in
> the cache (since each also appears on a single entry page).
This is a very tough decision. I think it would be helpful to step back and rethink exactly how we want to deal with displaying archived entries in general. What ways do people want to access their weblog entry data and how can we best facilitate that?
I think you could certainly argue that we should provide some way for bloggers to have a page that shows XX entries in a row starting at entry YY, but when do people really want that functionality?
Interstingly enough, as part of the process for updating our caching keys I actually decided that I needed to better section out the different types of weblog pages that we currently support. I narrowed the pages into 3 sections, MAIN (the weblog main page), PERMALINK (a single entry archive), and ARCHIVE (a multi entry archive). I think the MAIN and PERMALINK pages are pretty well scoped, but the ARCHIVE pages are not. By that I mean that we don't really have a clear strategy right now on how to best handle ARCHIVE pages and it seems like this is something we should spend a little time discussing.
Just thinking out laud now, but one possiblity I had considered was something like this ...
- the MAIN page only shows the XX most recent entries for a weblog (/page/<handle>)
- a PERMALINK page shows only a single entry (/page/<handle>/permalink/<anchor>)
- an ARCHIVE shows a multi entry page (pagified if needed) (/page/<handle>/archive/*)
* archive/2005
* archive/200509
* archive/20050920
* archive/category
* archive/category?page=3
something like this would give us a bit more url structure than we have now and allow for a bit more organization. we could then allow a Roller user to define special templates for an ARCHIVE page versus a PERMALINK page versus the MAIN page so that they could control how they work.
-- Allen
Re: No way to navigate back in 2.0
Posted by Glenn Nielsen <gl...@earthdome.org>.
Hi, this is my first post on the roller lists.
I have a request related to paging back to previous blog
posts using the calendar.
Do not provide a link back to the previous month/day/year if
you are beyond the blogs first post and of course don't link
to a future month/year.
This prevents bots from recursively following the calendar
backwards or forwards when there are no blog entries.
On my roller site I created a simple archives page that lists
links with the title for every blog entry. I did this so that
search engines get an opportunity to index all of the blog entries.
I did this by creating a simple JavaBean which uses the Roller API.
This JavaBean can then be used in a simple JSP page which just lists
the archived links/titles.
Regards,
Glenn Nielsen
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:50:41PM -0500, Dave Johnson wrote:
>
> On Nov 29, 2005, at 2:15 PM, Allen Gilliland wrote:
> >gotcha. definitely seems like something we should continue to have.
>
> Yep, we need some way to page back in time.
>
>
> >i will admit though, that i think our weblog entry pagification is a
> >bit quirky and messed up. i don't use it, so it doesn't bother me
> >much, but i know of 2 things that i've noted in the past.
> >
> >1. the next/previous links don't work properly for permalinks.
> >previous works, but next always goes to the most recent entry.
>
> That's how it should work on a single entry page.
>
>
> >2. a date based archive like /page/20050920 shows a full page of
> >entries rather than just the entries from that day. why?
>
> That's how Roller has always worked, and it's wrong. It causes cache
> duplication and it can even prevent people from viewing entries. For
> example, let's say you have 50 posts on one day, but you're blog is
> configured to show only the most recent 15 entries. You miss entries 16
> through 50.
>
>
> >it seems to me that we should support all 3 date based urls, /2005,
> >/200509, /20050920, and each should be limited to the scope of the
> >date presented. i.e. if someone just puts the year then they will
> >only see entries for that year, same for month, same for day.
>
> We should definitely support single-entry, day, month and year views.
> For the year and month views, we might want to get creative and show a
> calendar rather than a bandwidth-busting big page of entries.
>
> But the main page of a blog should display some number of days recent
> posts, with the option of displaying them grouped by day.
>
> So, if we provide access to month, day and year views, do we really
> need a way to page back in time in chunks of X entries at a time? I
> like that features, but it causes weblog entries to be duplicated in
> the cache (since each also appears on a single entry page).
>
> - Dave
>
>
>
> >
> >wouldn't that make a lot more sense?
> >
> >-- Allen
> >
> >
> >On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 11:07, Matt Raible wrote:
> >>Look at http://jroller.com/page/raible - and scroll to the bottom of
> >>the page. There's a link to see the previous 10 posts.
> >>
> >>Look at http://raibledesigns.com and scroll to the bottom - the link
> >>no longer exists.
> >>
> >>Matt
> >>
> >>On 11/29/05, Allen Gilliland <Al...@sun.com> wrote:
> >>>I'm not sure I understand what functionality you guys are talking
> >>>about. Is this something that is found on weblog pages? or on the
> >>>editor/admin UI?
> >>>
> >>>-- Allen
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 19:24, Dave Johnson wrote:
> >>>>That one slipped through the cracks.
> >>>>
> >>>>There's a next-prev macro that works on single-entry pages, but we
> >>>>should add that back.
> >>>>
> >>>>- Dave
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:23 PM, Matt Raible wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>One of the features I liked in Roller 1.x was a link at the bottom
> >>>>>of
> >>>>>a page that linked page a page to previous posts. This seems to be
> >>>>>missing from Roller 2.0 - why?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Matt
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
Glenn
Re: No way to navigate back in 2.0
Posted by Dave Johnson <da...@rollerweblogger.org>.
On Nov 29, 2005, at 2:15 PM, Allen Gilliland wrote:
> gotcha. definitely seems like something we should continue to have.
Yep, we need some way to page back in time.
> i will admit though, that i think our weblog entry pagification is a
> bit quirky and messed up. i don't use it, so it doesn't bother me
> much, but i know of 2 things that i've noted in the past.
>
> 1. the next/previous links don't work properly for permalinks.
> previous works, but next always goes to the most recent entry.
That's how it should work on a single entry page.
> 2. a date based archive like /page/20050920 shows a full page of
> entries rather than just the entries from that day. why?
That's how Roller has always worked, and it's wrong. It causes cache
duplication and it can even prevent people from viewing entries. For
example, let's say you have 50 posts on one day, but you're blog is
configured to show only the most recent 15 entries. You miss entries 16
through 50.
> it seems to me that we should support all 3 date based urls, /2005,
> /200509, /20050920, and each should be limited to the scope of the
> date presented. i.e. if someone just puts the year then they will
> only see entries for that year, same for month, same for day.
We should definitely support single-entry, day, month and year views.
For the year and month views, we might want to get creative and show a
calendar rather than a bandwidth-busting big page of entries.
But the main page of a blog should display some number of days recent
posts, with the option of displaying them grouped by day.
So, if we provide access to month, day and year views, do we really
need a way to page back in time in chunks of X entries at a time? I
like that features, but it causes weblog entries to be duplicated in
the cache (since each also appears on a single entry page).
- Dave
>
> wouldn't that make a lot more sense?
>
> -- Allen
>
>
> On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 11:07, Matt Raible wrote:
>> Look at http://jroller.com/page/raible - and scroll to the bottom of
>> the page. There's a link to see the previous 10 posts.
>>
>> Look at http://raibledesigns.com and scroll to the bottom - the link
>> no longer exists.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> On 11/29/05, Allen Gilliland <Al...@sun.com> wrote:
>>> I'm not sure I understand what functionality you guys are talking
>>> about. Is this something that is found on weblog pages? or on the
>>> editor/admin UI?
>>>
>>> -- Allen
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 19:24, Dave Johnson wrote:
>>>> That one slipped through the cracks.
>>>>
>>>> There's a next-prev macro that works on single-entry pages, but we
>>>> should add that back.
>>>>
>>>> - Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:23 PM, Matt Raible wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> One of the features I liked in Roller 1.x was a link at the bottom
>>>>> of
>>>>> a page that linked page a page to previous posts. This seems to be
>>>>> missing from Roller 2.0 - why?
>>>>>
>>>>> Matt
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
Re: No way to navigate back in 2.0
Posted by Allen Gilliland <Al...@Sun.COM>.
gotcha. definitely seems like something we should continue to have.
i will admit though, that i think our weblog entry pagification is a bit quirky and messed up. i don't use it, so it doesn't bother me much, but i know of 2 things that i've noted in the past.
1. the next/previous links don't work properly for permalinks. previous works, but next always goes to the most recent entry.
2. a date based archive like /page/20050920 shows a full page of entries rather than just the entries from that day. why? it seems to me that we should support all 3 date based urls, /2005, /200509, /20050920, and each should be limited to the scope of the date presented. i.e. if someone just puts the year then they will only see entries for that year, same for month, same for day.
wouldn't that make a lot more sense?
-- Allen
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 11:07, Matt Raible wrote:
> Look at http://jroller.com/page/raible - and scroll to the bottom of
> the page. There's a link to see the previous 10 posts.
>
> Look at http://raibledesigns.com and scroll to the bottom - the link
> no longer exists.
>
> Matt
>
> On 11/29/05, Allen Gilliland <Al...@sun.com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure I understand what functionality you guys are talking about. Is this something that is found on weblog pages? or on the editor/admin UI?
> >
> > -- Allen
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 19:24, Dave Johnson wrote:
> > > That one slipped through the cracks.
> > >
> > > There's a next-prev macro that works on single-entry pages, but we
> > > should add that back.
> > >
> > > - Dave
> > >
> > >
> > > On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:23 PM, Matt Raible wrote:
> > >
> > > > One of the features I liked in Roller 1.x was a link at the bottom of
> > > > a page that linked page a page to previous posts. This seems to be
> > > > missing from Roller 2.0 - why?
> > > >
> > > > Matt
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
Re: No way to navigate back in 2.0
Posted by Matt Raible <mr...@gmail.com>.
Look at http://jroller.com/page/raible - and scroll to the bottom of
the page. There's a link to see the previous 10 posts.
Look at http://raibledesigns.com and scroll to the bottom - the link
no longer exists.
Matt
On 11/29/05, Allen Gilliland <Al...@sun.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand what functionality you guys are talking about. Is this something that is found on weblog pages? or on the editor/admin UI?
>
> -- Allen
>
>
> On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 19:24, Dave Johnson wrote:
> > That one slipped through the cracks.
> >
> > There's a next-prev macro that works on single-entry pages, but we
> > should add that back.
> >
> > - Dave
> >
> >
> > On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:23 PM, Matt Raible wrote:
> >
> > > One of the features I liked in Roller 1.x was a link at the bottom of
> > > a page that linked page a page to previous posts. This seems to be
> > > missing from Roller 2.0 - why?
> > >
> > > Matt
> > >
> >
>
>
Re: No way to navigate back in 2.0
Posted by Allen Gilliland <Al...@Sun.COM>.
I'm not sure I understand what functionality you guys are talking about. Is this something that is found on weblog pages? or on the editor/admin UI?
-- Allen
On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 19:24, Dave Johnson wrote:
> That one slipped through the cracks.
>
> There's a next-prev macro that works on single-entry pages, but we
> should add that back.
>
> - Dave
>
>
> On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:23 PM, Matt Raible wrote:
>
> > One of the features I liked in Roller 1.x was a link at the bottom of
> > a page that linked page a page to previous posts. This seems to be
> > missing from Roller 2.0 - why?
> >
> > Matt
> >
>
Re: No way to navigate back in 2.0
Posted by Dave Johnson <da...@rollerweblogger.org>.
That one slipped through the cracks.
There's a next-prev macro that works on single-entry pages, but we
should add that back.
- Dave
On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:23 PM, Matt Raible wrote:
> One of the features I liked in Roller 1.x was a link at the bottom of
> a page that linked page a page to previous posts. This seems to be
> missing from Roller 2.0 - why?
>
> Matt
>