Skip to forum content

LuxCal Web Calendar

The place for news, questions and suggestions

You are not logged in. Please login or register.

Post new reply

Post new reply

Compose and post your new reply

You may use: BBCode Images Smilies

All fields with bold label must be completed before the form is submitted.

Required information for guests


Required information

Topic review (newest first)

3 Post by NorfolkGreg

Hi Roel,

Now I feel guilty! I really should have checked the code before making the request. As I have never used such glyphs in my own work and it just never occurred to me that they were any thing but images supplied within LuxCal.

In spite of the problems they cause I support your decision to use them within LuxCal. I'll just have a re-think about what goes in my user notes which are mainly aimed at 70+ year olds with extremely limited computing skills, when acurate representations of what they might see on screen are important. Now I know you can't control that completely, I can work around it.

2 Post by Roel

Hi Greg,

This is the struggle of all programmers: how to make sure the application displays correctly and similarly in all the different browsers and browser versions and on all the different devices, with different screen sizes.
For LuxCal we have chosen, and so far managed, to use Unicode/HTML character entities, rather than separate image files, to represent glyph images, The reasons for doing this are the following:
• standardization; The Unicode/HTML character entities are meant - in the long run - to standardize the glyphs used in all web applications and therefore improve the user experience.
• efficiency: no need to load load images from the server for each glyph.
• better software: code not cluttered with unnecessary <img>-tags

The disadvantages are that not all browsers (in particular older versions) support all new Unicode/HTML character entities yet. But the good news is that since a couple of years the standardization among browsers has improved at a rapid pace.

So the dilemma is: do we want to be hold back by older browsers, not adhering to web standards (like IE held us back during the last 2 centuries), or will we go with the flow, which will eventually lead to software applications with a much better graphical user interface, taking the current disadvantages, which will eventually automatically disappear, for granted?

Let us wait and see what other calendar users have to say about this . . .

Roel

1 Post by NorfolkGreg

As I try to write comprehensive guides for my users I have discovered that some screens can vary significantly on different devices. While some of this can be applauded as a way of making screens more usable on different sized devices, other differences me cause me problems.

For example, what image should I use to illustrate the "Select Date Button" on the Navigation Bar?

On my phone it shows "17" with a heading "July" on a blue background. On my tablet the same button appears as a month grid headed "May" on a green background. While on my Desktop it shows "21" (in a different format to my phone) with a heading "Mar" on a red background.

Similarly with the the "Previous" and "Next" buttons on the "View Bar" (as I call the one under the "Navigation Bar")

They show as dark arrowheads on both phone and desktop, while on my Tablet they show awkwardly slightly high on the bar as square buttons with a graduated blue tint containing white arrowheads.

Could the next release do away with such cosmetic differences in the standard product? (But by all means provide the differing images as resources which can be added to a user's own installation.)