I would like to seee something happen when you click on the title of the Chatterbox nodelet. The idea being to promote usability and laziness i.e; make it easier to follow chatter if that's why you're hanging around the monastery, and save having to reload more elaborate pages so much. Perhaps:

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Chatterbox improvement?
by Zecho (Hermit) on Nov 09, 2001 at 04:54 UTC
    Something like this?
    Just be sure to read the bottom line.

    Update: just wanted to be clear that the link provided is not my work.

[reply]
      Exactly! Err not quite exactly, a few nits ;-) I would do: 
      <HTML>
<FRAMESET ROWS="150,*">
    <FRAME SRC="index.pl?node=ad_and_talk&displaytype=raw" MARGINWIDTH
+=0 MARGINHEIGHT=0 SCROLLING=NO NORESIZE>
    <FRAMESET COLS="80%,20%">
        <FRAMESET ROWS="*,100,50">
            <FRAME SRC="index.pl?node=showchatmessages&displaytype=raw
+">
            <FRAME SRC="index.pl?node=showprivatemessages&displaytype=
+raw&type=superdoc">
            <FRAME SRC="index.pl?node=talk+links&displaytype=raw">
        </FRAMESET>
        <FRAME SRC="index.pl?node=showotherusers&displaytype=raw">
    </FRAMESET>
</FRAMESET>
</HTML>

      [download]
      Other than that I would just suggest:
      • Not doing the frameset for showother users if they have the users nodelet disabled
        UPDATE: Actually just make this optional. I guess I'd rather have the user list show up here and *not* on the main pages...
      • Reversing the order of messages in showchatmessages
      • Configurable refresh(for each refreshing section? or global?) 30 sec is a touch high and makes it a little hard to read large/concurrent messages. It also might incur to much server load?
      UPDATE: I've also run into a weird bug. After a few reloads of an empty privatemessage frame the frame changes to an embedded chatter (as in the whole frameset)
[reply]
[d/l]
        See http://pthbb.org/cb/ for an example of most of this (maybe more as I get around to it) implemented. For the paranoid (if not you should be! ;-) You can view the source for http://pthbb.org/cb/blather.php3 via a symlink at http://pthbb.org/cb/blather.

        Yes yes PHP, oh the horror. But frankly I'm not doing any heavy lifting and it's a pip-squeak box (Pentium 120 with 128M running more a few choice daemons)

        Anyways I plan on using this (at least until/if ever) the equivalent is officially sanctioned, been using fullpage chat

        PS> It seems the adfu in the original framed chat node broke in the last few days since this thread began....

[reply]
Re: Chatterbox improvement?
by footpad (Abbot) on Nov 09, 2001 at 03:27 UTC

    Well...until something is formally set up, you can always set up your own copy of framechat (or one of the other Chatterbox clients) and then send yourself a /msg linking to it, using something like:

    /msg belg4mit [http://someurl.com/chatclient.cgi|full screen chat]

    This way, you'd have a link near the top of your Chatterbox that does exactly what you want. Well, perhaps not exactly, but close in any event.

    Also, if you need space to host it, I believe this offer is still valid. (Ask nicely, though. He'd probably appreciate the courtesy.)

    --f

[reply]
[d/l]
Re: Chatterbox improvement?
by growlf (Pilgrim) on Nov 09, 2001 at 06:33 UTC
    Wow - I like it! Some small nit-picky things though:
    1. the name links on the right side, link to the same frame.. should set target frame to center main frame
    2. a refresh button would be nice for when you want to force a refresh or a custom refresh interval setting
    3. The log in action was quirky. Not sure what was going on there. It did not apply the theme or show me as logged in untill i did son in the middle fram at one point. Then all went well.
    Once again. let me say i like this. Please continue to build on this and implement it more permanently, as i intend to use this from now on.

    *G*
[reply]
Re: Chatterbox improvement?
by rob_au (Abbot) on Nov 09, 2001 at 16:36 UTC
    This level of functionality for the chatter box is already available in the form of the Framechat chatterbox client and the Java chatterbox - The latter of which I use on a regular basis without any problems whatsoever.

     

    Ooohhh, Rob no beer function well without!

[reply]
      Yes, I am aware of that. But as I tried to state initially; hence "*the* java client"; this is about making such functionality more readily available/convenient. I'm sure this may be very similar to framechat, but again my point it to make it more useable even if you don't have the time/means/inclination to install framechat somewher. Why ought there be dozens of installations of something somewhere that is effectively a website when it could be centrally located and available to all?
[reply]

Back to Perl Monks Discussion