81 replies to this topic

[Jarno Mikkola]

I'm attaching two images, of what the examples should look like. If they don't look like what I see, it would be great to know what browser you're using. Two of my three browsers are beta browers... so I'm not sure if the site looks normal in IE 6, and Firefox.

Well, I use the Firefox, and everything looks fine exept the names that the browser gives to the icons that do the different functions, they give me: java script:getcomps('237') etc. , which is fine for now, as you'll get to the renaming in time, after you have got them all documentation for the mods form the NPC-Related Mods to Tactical Challenges done.

Ah, just remember... you are doing this for fun, so no need hurry, as long as you get this all done by tomorrow.

[SConrad]

I thought I replied earlier to the examples--apparently I didn't...

In any case, I believe the icons need some descriptions. It's a bit difficult to deciphering their meaning without clicking them, and a lot of people often hesitate to click links they don't understand.

From a visual standpoint, you might want to consider using a sans-serif font for the descriptions. Also, instead of doing <a href="java script:function();">, you can do <a href="#" onclick="function(); return false;">. It's good coding standard, since that makes it possible for links to work both as AJAXy functions, but also allow for an actual link in case the user doesn't have jscript enabled.

Other than that, it looks really, really good. As previously mentioned, don't hesitate to let us/me know if you want or need any help.

[Michael]

Ah, just remember... you are doing this for fun, so no need hurry, as long as you get this all done by tomorrow.

Aww, but I only got four hours of sleep last night... though I mostly blame that on South Park Studios launching.

In any case, I believe the icons need some descriptions. It's a bit difficult to deciphering their meaning without clicking them, and a lot of people often hesitate to click links they don't understand.

I changed it to have some text, but I'm not-a likin' it. This site is for people to use the tool, so I think they'd figure what the buttons are. Maybe I'm wrong, though. If the site were meant to be a PPG-modlist alternative for general public use, then I guess...
I dunno. I figure it was fine how it was, but right now it has text. Let me know what you think.

From a visual standpoint, you might want to consider using a sans-serif font for the descriptions. Also, instead of doing <a href="java script:function();">, you can do <a href="#" onclick="function(); return false;">. It's good coding standard, since that makes it possible for links to work both as AJAXy functions, but also allow for an actual link in case the user doesn't have jscript enabled.

Alright, I changed the links to go to the main page view if the user doesn't have scripting enabled, and use AJAX to do it right on the page if they do. I left the 'add to installation' and 'get components' buttons as they are, since only people who are using the site to generate the XML will use those, and should understand what they mean. I'll update the front page with an explanation of all the icons and such in a bit.

Well, I use the Firefox, and everything looks fine exept the names that the browser gives to the icons that do the different functions, they give me: java script:getcomps('237') etc. , which is fine for now, as you'll get to the renaming in time, after you have got them all documentation for the mods form the NPC-Related Mods to Tactical Challenges done.

The getcomps(xxx) name isn't really going to change, as that is just the code. What I said to Conrad's post should explain my thinking. Again, I could be wrong.

Other than that, it looks really, really good. As previously mentioned, don't hesitate to let us/me know if you want or need any help.

Thanks for the support. All I really need at the moment is feedback.

---

Alright, so, feedback. I mentioned how I wanted this to be community-manageable, so an author can easily go in, edit their mod information, add a mirror, and people can keep things up to date if they want. The whole Wikimedia way of thinking. Though, I'm unsure what the chances of vandalism is with this... Right now you need a special little code to edit anything - I suppose I can just give that to anyone who wants to edit the pages for a good reason, or wants to help out. If I use multiple codes and log which ones are used for changes, I'd then know who not to give keys to in the future.

Thoughts? Comments? Feedback?

Thanks again for your time.

[SConrad]

From a visual standpoint, you might want to consider using a sans-serif font for the descriptions. Also, instead of doing <a href="java script:function();">, you can do <a href="#" onclick="function(); return false;">. It's good coding standard, since that makes it possible for links to work both as AJAXy functions, but also allow for an actual link in case the user doesn't have jscript enabled.

Alright, I changed the links to go to the main page view if the user doesn't have scripting enabled, and use AJAX to do it right on the page if they do. I left the 'add to installation' and 'get components' buttons as they are, since only people who are using the site to generate the XML will use those, and should understand what they mean. I'll update the front page with an explanation of all the icons and such in a bit.

Well, working non-jscript links might not be a feasible addition in this case, since the page relies heavily on javascript, I just thought I'd mention it since it was something I noticed in the source.

You could always add a custom page that says "You need to have JavaScript enabled to use the features of this list." or something where the links point to.

Alright, so, feedback. I mentioned how I wanted this to be community-manageable, so an author can easily go in, edit their mod information, add a mirror, and people can keep things up to date if they want. The whole Wikimedia way of thinking. Though, I'm unsure what the chances of vandalism is with this... Right now you need a special little code to edit anything - I suppose I can just give that to anyone who wants to edit the pages for a good reason, or wants to help out. If I use multiple codes and log which ones are used for changes, I'd then know who not to give keys to in the future.

The special little code will probably only make things more difficult to actually get people to help out--if someone are using the list and want to change a link or add a mirror, they're far less likely to actually do it if they have to get a code before they can. The wiki "free-for-all" philosophy is based on simplicity and a heavily reduced number of obstacles a user has to climb over in order to change anything; and a special code defeats the purpose--especially if you have to manually give it to everybody. Most people who notice that something is wrong but can't do anything about it without having to go through password-obtaining procedures are just going to ignore it.

No matter what the rates of user vandalism are, with the "free-for-all" approach, you simply have to add some sort of CAPTCHA, or you're going to have a lot more headache than you want.

In any case, keeping revisions is a good idea.

[Michael]

Well, working non-jscript links might not be a feasible addition in this case, since the page relies heavily on javascript, I just thought I'd mention it since it was something I noticed in the source.

You could always add a custom page that says "You need to have JavaScript enabled to use the features of this list." or something where the links point to.

I'll add something like that to the front page when I redo it.

The special little code will probably only make things more difficult to actually get people to help out--if someone are using the list and want to change a link or add a mirror, they're far less likely to actually do it if they have to get a code before they can. The wiki "free-for-all" philosophy is based on simplicity and a heavily reduced number of obstacles a user has to climb over in order to change anything; and a special code defeats the purpose--especially if you have to manually give it to everybody. Most people who notice that something is wrong but can't do anything about it without having to go through password-obtaining procedures are just going to ignore it.

No matter what the rates of user vandalism are, with the "free-for-all" approach, you simply have to add some sort of CAPTCHA, or you're going to have a lot more headache than you want.

In any case, keeping revisions is a good idea.

Alright, I'll work on learning how to make a CAPTCHA... then switch that out for the code to open it up.

More features after the CAPTCHA I want to do is the ability to add mods, remove mods, add categories, and remove categories.

As always, thanks!

EDIT: I'm cheating, and using a different CAPTCHA.
EDIT2: Ah, and it is opened up to the community!

Edited by Michael, 27 March 2008 - 11:36 AM.

[Michael]

Alright, I'd say that version 1 of the site is done now. (Oh hey, look, it's 3am.) Changes since my last post:

• Anyone can now contribute to the site, using simple interfaces and a CAPTCHA.
  
• Categories are now shown on the mod page.
  
• Multi-category support.
  
• Mods can now be added.
  
• Roll-over text on download mirrors while in the main category view displays the version number of the download.
  
• ALL mods now have up-to-date mirrors. Home pages and forums are linked to if available.

Still no known bugs.

Tomorrow (today) I'll probably start working on version 2 of the site, which will be focused on building the XML file, which I want to get done before the end of spring break (hey, where'd my week go?!).

As always, feedback is awesomely awesome. And stuff. Feature requests also would be nice... a link to mods with no category may be nice, in case someone makes the mod category-less.

EDIT: *backs up database...*
EDIT: Perhaps I should start a topic in a relevant forum with this when it's ready?

Edited by Michael, 29 March 2008 - 03:11 AM.

[Kulyok]

Quite; you might want to drum a little publicity, like announcing it on all major modding/playing sites, and so on. It's very good to have another modlist, so we can rip off each other. And timely, too.

(I'll add IEMI to Modlist->Online resources, next to IE Modding News and RPGWatch news, in the meanwhile).

[berelinde]

Wow. This is so cool! I love the fact that you can view the components before downloading!

Later on, I'm going to have to see if I can edit Gavin's component list, though, since the portrait selections changed for version 3, with the addition of two more by K'aeloree and one by Amaurea.

Edit: And I was able to update the component list with only a slight learning curve! Very cool.

The learning curve referenced above had to do with figuring out how to open a command line on Vista, BTW. The user interface was very user-friendly.

Edited by berelinde, 29 March 2008 - 06:06 AM.

[Oldwolf]

Great site and idea Michael! A lot of noobs to the mega mod world will find this a great tool as they learn about it's existance. From a mod USER point of view one of the hardest things I found about creating a mega mod was finding out which mods had what conflicts with what other mods I wanted to use. This tool/website of yours will definately make that much less likely to be a problem. Thanks for the hard work!

[SConrad]

Additional suggestions:

• Search function - believe me, this will be invaluable. I really can't stress this enough.
  
• Link consistency - examples; Fade, Iylos and Nathaniel all have different links; one point to a custom website, one to a download page and one to the SHS page. I similar trends with non-SHS mods, as well. I suggest the linking system should be conformed as much as possible--that way, users will have an easier time navigating and finding the right information.

It looks good, in any case. Good work!

[Michael]

-snip-

Whoo for ripping off!
I'll go ahead and make some topics on other sites, and add a link page which will link to the PPG group.

-snip-

Glad you like it. Do you find the editing interface good enough? It should be simple. But, as I said. Feedback goood.

Yeah for the command prompt... I tried that for a few seconds before I did:

Not sure if that works in XP, but it's very hand.

-snip-

^^ Whoo, interest! Well, your very welcome for the work, I'm glad to help out. The main aim is to make things simple, which it seems is happening.

-snip

I'll add a search function next.
I've updated Iylos and Nathaniel to have the http://spellholdstudios.net/ie/xxxx home page. I'll try to keep things similar in the future. But, I suppose that is why it is open to everyone - so if people think that, they can edit it.

---

I've also added a section where you can add/edit Infinity Engine links.

---

Edit: You can now search mod names, authors, and descriptions.

Edited by Michael, 29 March 2008 - 12:10 PM.

[berelinde]

Yes, it was very simple and very conveient to edit the component listing myself. Copy, paste, validate, click.

I'll have a mod to add soonish, so I'll let you know how that goes then. I expect it will be equally user-friendly.

[Michael]

Yes, it was very simple and very conveient to edit the component listing myself. Copy, paste, validate, click.

I'll have a mod to add soonish, so I'll let you know how that goes then. I expect it will be equally user-friendly.

It should be. Let me know what you think of it when you add to the database.

[berelinde]

That was not me, by the way.

[Michael]

You are informed that the mod has been added when you click the 'add mod' button - whether you've filled in any of the details or not (including the CAPTCHA). I have therefore added at least three empty mods to the database, to aid your debugging.

Forgot to add the CAPTCHA check it seems. Fixed now, and added a check to make sure the person used a name, description, and group.

[Ascension64]

I almost overlooked this, but this is a superb initiative! Congratulations!
I'm not sure if you've read my silly spiel on the principles of making mod installers for modder and player benefit, but it's at http://www.shsforums...showtopic=31041.
One thing I was wondering about was how installation order is determined. Could you explain whether you have a mechanism in place to determine installation order based on conflict resolution, and after dealing with that whether there is any generic structure to installation order (like 'alphabetical', or the 'order you list them', etc.)?

[Michael]

-snip-

I think I looked at it a while ago, but I'll take another look at it now.

What I had planned to do is have a bloated list that has all the components listed in the order where they would be most compatible. In example, we'd have something like:

~SETUP-MODA.TP2~ #0 #0 // Mod A
~SETUP-MODB.TP2~ #0 #0 // Mod B
~SETUP-MODC.TP2~ #0 #0 // Mod C

That would be the order that mods have to be installed. This can be split into individual components, not just actual mods. Let's say Mod A and Mod C can't be installed together. A flag will be thrown saying such, highlighting the components in a redish background. Underneath will be a message that tells what exactly is the problem.

How this will be done is I'll have a master list of all mods generated. Mods can be moved on the list by the community. The code will go down the list, see if the user has selected the component for installation, and remove it from your installation if it has not been. Then it will go down the list again to detect conflicts.

If I'm unclear or stupid, please let me know.

-snip-

I've added an error message if you put in the wrong CAPTCHA, now.

I've also added a bit more space between the categories and made the text into a label as well. I've also done this on edit information page for the mod.

You can close the component list on the category view page. Just click on the icon: