Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi Eric,
Can you share a link to your site? I’d like to see exactly what is happening before I can tell you anything useful.
If you like to keep the URL private, please use the contact form to send it to me without posting it publicly.
Rolf
Hi Daniel, no this is not possible. There is a new plugin planned for this fall which will be using the newer fancyBox2 script. This script has the thumbnail feature as you are looking for.
All Easy FancyBox Pro users will get a (big) discount for this new plugin so please stand by 🙂
Hi Jon, good to hear you solved the issue on your site and thanks for sharing 🙂
For future reference: the problem is that with the masked URL (even when you assign it the “fancybox” class) FancyBox does not know how to interpret the media type. The script ‘only’ scans for file name extension and decides it to be an image based when it finds .jpg/png/etc… With your masked URL, this is (probaly) not the case and FancyBox falls back to HTML content.
Two approaches are possible:
1. make the masked URLs re-use the image file name extension (and only replace the file path and name) or
2. force FancyBox to interpret the media type as image.The first solution needs to be done in the theme or the URL masking plugin. The second can be done by activating the option “Include Metadata jQuery extension…” and appending the class like:
class="fancybox {type:'image'}"The next release of Easy FancyBox will include the possibility to use
class="fancybox image"without the need to include the Metadata extension.No problem Bart, I appreciate your thoughts 🙂
I only wanted to say that I think the Jetpack approach might be a good thing…
I’m not completely convinced yet. The “how / in what way” is not some much the issue as is the “why”.
You must consider that the javascript that is inserted is not adding much rendering time as opposed to the server taking extra requests. Many WordPress themes and plugins already add sooooo many extra requests.
So it really boils down to additional source rendering time versus extra request and response time. Server versus visitor location and server resources like CPU, memory, max concurrent requests etc. come into play here. Every case is different and there is no ‘one fits all’ solution.
Plus, when you install a caching plugin like WP Super Cache, W3 Total Cache (or any of the others) or if you’re using a server cache mechanism (like Nginx Fast CGI Cache) then the additional redering time will no longer count for cached responses.
Plus, on most websites most visitor will only open one page, only some browse to one more page before leaving again. Very rarely will a visitor browse more than 3 or 4 pages on the same site and it is only in the latter cases that the advantage of browser cache comes into play.
… and that perhaps using a random token would alleviate some or all of the problems you have identified.
The problem with query strings is that some proxy servers and server cache mechanisms will not cache these.
You see all the “buts” there 😉
why not write these codes out to a file that then gets dynamically linked?
Because it is more difficult to maintain across different installations/setups. Server environment (response headers for re-validation, etag etc., write permissions…), WordPress directory locations, single-/multisite installation etc. Plus, the caching that you desire will cause many users to come to me complaining that their changed settings ‘do not work’.
However, I’ve been considering a sort of ‘half way’ approach. Similar to what the Custom CSS module in Jetpack uses. It might be implemented in the near future…
Hi Bart,
The javascript and css you see in the page source (header) is there because that is dynamically generated depending on plugin options and (in the case of IE specific css) file paths. Placing this in the page source is actually faster than feeding it via a separate (dynamic) request.
All the javascript and css that does not need to be dynamic, like the script libraries and main stylesheet, are loaded from static files.
In the next release, the Internet Explorer 6, 7 and 8 specific style rules will not be included by default anymore. These browsers have become (I’m happy to say) uncommon enough and it will take away the bulk of the style rules from your page source.
Hope that helps 🙂
Hi Jonathan, the width and height parameters will not do anything but increasing the radius parameter should make your clock larger.
Parameters can be found on http://status301.net/wordpress-plugins/coolclock/ under FAQ “Can I insert a clock in posts or pages?” and on http://status301.net/coolclock-advanced/ where the advanced parameters are listed.
Hope that helps 🙂
Hi David,
What the featured image links to is not something that is controlled by Easy FancyBox. It is the theme that dictates the href attribute of the link. If that is the large/full version of the featured image, then Easy FancyBox will detect it and bind itself to that link. The full image will then be opened inside the lightbox. You can prevent Easy FancyBox from binding to that link, but that will not change the links href destination. Users will then simply get the full image version straight in their browser instead of in the lightbox overlay.
To make the link destination change from the full featured image to the actual post itself, you’ll have to adapt your theme. Or ask the theme developers to include this feature in the next version. It may even be already included as a theme option… 🙂
Hi again, I just received an e-mail about the same (or similar?) issue. In that case, it turns out the Social Sharebar plugin script throws an error on search result pages:
Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property 'top' of undefinedwhich blocks any script action after that, including the coolclock script.
Is your case the same?
No idea why Sharebar only throws this error on search result pages and not on normal pages. You’ll have to contact the Sharebar plugin developer about that…
If there is an option in the Sharebar plugin settings that allows you to disable the sharebar on search result pages, then please try that 🙂
Hi Larry, there might be a script error occurring. Can you share a link to your site so I can see it live?
But you did create http://thatlou.com/ for example? Great stuff!
Hi jon, no I was actually referring to the use of the Metadata extension. You can see an example on http://wordpress.org/plugins/easy-fancybox/faq/ under “How do I show content with different sizes?” …
You will have to do:
1. Go to Settings > Media and check the option “Include Metadata jQuery extension…”
2. Changeclass"fb-margin"that you added to the links toclass"fancybox {titlePosition:outside,margin:60}"Now you are free to change the default title position to anything other, the slider images will always use Outside and a margin of 60…
Hope that helps 🙂
Hi,
The title (with position outside, float or inside) really only has space for one line. A second line might just fit but it depends on font sizes, line height and other styling (in your case added padding)…
There is an unused parameter (called margin) in FancyBox that allows to set a larger margin between the browser and the FancyBox frames. I’ll take this as a feature request for the upcoming Pro version 🙂
… is it possible to have different fancyboxes on different pages using different settings?
It is not possible to have different settings per page, but you can specify different parameters per media link. You will need to activate the option ‘Include Metadata jQuery extension’ which allows settings parameters like
{titlePosition:over}to the link class. Available parameters and their values can be found on http://fancybox.net/apiIn fact, if you can define/add classes for the slider on your homepage, then you could start using a different margin right away. Use something like
{margin:60}for more title space…Hi evgeny,
I just found your post in the spam filter. It seems to have been filtered out in error (maybe because of the image attachment) so I have made it public immediately. My apologies for not noticing this sooner.
If you still have issues with the title, could you please share a link to your live site? The screenshot you uploaded to http://forum.academ.org/ is only visible to users registered there…
My first guess would be that there is a CSS conflict going on but only a live example will help me debug this for you.
Kind regards,
Rolf
