How about the function that automatically opens the next side when you reach the end of the side?
Like in google-pictures.
Like in google-pictures.
Open the next side of what?
You see all posts in a in single window when browsing, there's no "end" to reach there... and I doubt it'd be a good idea to do that when you are looking at the post in full view (right, hit End to see the comments, and instead have it transport you to the next image??)
This idea probably needs to be thought about a little more...?
You see all posts in a in single window when browsing, there's no "end" to reach there... and I doubt it'd be a good idea to do that when you are looking at the post in full view (right, hit End to see the comments, and instead have it transport you to the next image??)
This idea probably needs to be thought about a little more...?
I agree with SK. I'm not saying that I hate your idea, but if there is an overabundance of images compressed into one huge page, then lag may start to occur. Well maybe not for fast computers, but it can for slower computers. I visted Sankuku Complex and they have the same function like google images. The only difference though was that there were ads that load across in between a certain amount of images. And since I have a slow computer, the loading process was appalling to me. IMHO I think it's better to keep "old school" here.
I never have lags xDDust said:
[...] lag may start to occur.[...]
Sorry i haven't thought of that.
I totally accept your argument not to implement such a function.
But i still wish for something like that,
because pressing the "next" button is such a pain for me -.-
Many modern browsers have a keyboard shortcut for going to the "next page", it looks for the link called "next", and it works fine in Konachan (except when looking at an image that belongs to a pool, in which case the "next page" leads you to the next image in the pool).trinkschokolade said:
because pressing the "next" button is such a pain for me
I believe it also works when looking at the thumbnail pictures.
I can't seem to search for both explicit and questionable at the same time
When I try to, I get this page:
http://konachan.com/post?tags=%20order:score%20rating:questionableplus
which only contains questionable pics
When I try to, I get this page:
http://konachan.com/post?tags=%20order:score%20rating:questionableplus
which only contains questionable pics
There's no OR operator in the search function yet.Lelouch24 said:
I can't seem to search for both explicit and questionable at the same time
When I try to, I get this page:
http://konachan.com/post?tags=%20order:score%20rating:questionableplus
which only contains questionable pics
actually Shuugo, there is: the tilde (~) is placed before both of the tags. the problem he's having is doing an OR search with metatags.
for instance, ~rating:q ~rating:e won't work because the tags are metatags. if he did ~dress ~gun, it would work because it's just a tag search.
for instance, ~rating:q ~rating:e won't work because the tags are metatags. if he did ~dress ~gun, it would work because it's just a tag search.
"both explicit and questionable" == "not safe"
order:score -rating:safe
?
it isn't able to search for several ratings at once, only equality and inequality
tech note
order:score -rating:safe
?
it isn't able to search for several ratings at once, only equality and inequality
tech note
Thank you, works greatnaikoto said:
"both explicit and questionable" == "not safe"
order:score -rating:safe
?
it isn't able to search for several ratings at once, only equality and inequality
tech note
though, the option "questionable & explicit" in the advanced search still doesn't show explicit search results. I know how to get around this, but it seems like an easy fix
What if we have no limits on the number of sources that you can apply to a single post. People like to photoshop images from different sources and combine them together into a single image. Like post #47054 for example. The uploader can apply 2 artist tags to the post, but at the same time they cannot apply 2 seperate sources.
"Source" refers to where you actually got the file from, not quite what was used to make it. That's technically what Parent/Child is for. In the case of photoshopping images together, a comment denoting that fact and the originals would be a better explanation.
The exception is when relatively minor edits are done, like a crops or BG extensions. Still, for the most part, the "SOURCE" block would tell you where the image (file) itself came from, not, "This is what I used to make this image."
The image you reference is a clusterfuck I tried to organize a long time ago. Technically the parent/child for that is utterly wrong as well. I forgot to switch it back (or just completyely undo it). The system doesn't support multiple parents, which be more of the situation you would be talikng about. However, the code to handle parent/childs would have to be completely overhauled for that to work. I don't think any of the devs care to do that right now. (Most are most concerneda bout trying to unscrew the bugs from the switch to v3 of the engine. The parnet/child idea would also require a change to how the DB is set up. No one wants to touch that unless absolutely necessary with tangible benefits.)
The exception is when relatively minor edits are done, like a crops or BG extensions. Still, for the most part, the "SOURCE" block would tell you where the image (file) itself came from, not, "This is what I used to make this image."
The image you reference is a clusterfuck I tried to organize a long time ago. Technically the parent/child for that is utterly wrong as well. I forgot to switch it back (or just completyely undo it). The system doesn't support multiple parents, which be more of the situation you would be talikng about. However, the code to handle parent/childs would have to be completely overhauled for that to work. I don't think any of the devs care to do that right now. (Most are most concerneda bout trying to unscrew the bugs from the switch to v3 of the engine. The parnet/child idea would also require a change to how the DB is set up. No one wants to touch that unless absolutely necessary with tangible benefits.)
Huh, well I feel stupid now for suggesting something like that, haha, oh well. Thanks for the feedback though Stahn, I was just curious to know if this site supported that kind of thing. Anyways I'm hoping the new engine will turn out ok , there have been a steady amount of complaints about bugs and glitches lately.StahnAileron said:
They're mainly working off of what they had. Core functionally is being kept as-is for now without code overhaul to make it actually better. (Unless someone has the time and dedication to do that... And none of the current devs really have both.) New features my be added if it doesn't interfere with older functionality in a major way. Otherwise, no one eants to touch anything that already works. And no one wants to fuck with the DB at all (once the DB structure get modified, every single back-up DB you have is essentially useless. Plus there's the issue of stocking any new fields with actual data that need it. That's another matter altogther though.)
The new engine mostly fixed external modules to the site, I think. That along with a handful of fixes and additions many staffers have asked for previously. (Like unfucking a few Dtext quirks, though that added NEW quirks...) From what I know, it's been mainly fixes for bugs and quirks on the site for now. Wholly new functionality isn't being implemented. Anything "new" you see is mainly just working off previous code to implement similar functions in a different pare of the site (like "PREVIEW" in Dmail).
I'm not directly involved in coding. I'm mainly make suggestions/recommendations to Shuugo and discuss any other idea we (the staff) may have. Shuugo does some simple changes while the major stuff gets deferred to the core engine coders. You'd have to head over to Yander.re to get in touch with the core engine coders. Yande.re (formerly oreno/moe.imouto.org) is the main site for development. Kona uses a customized version of that site's engine (a.k.a. the Moebooru Engine).
The new engine mostly fixed external modules to the site, I think. That along with a handful of fixes and additions many staffers have asked for previously. (Like unfucking a few Dtext quirks, though that added NEW quirks...) From what I know, it's been mainly fixes for bugs and quirks on the site for now. Wholly new functionality isn't being implemented. Anything "new" you see is mainly just working off previous code to implement similar functions in a different pare of the site (like "PREVIEW" in Dmail).
I'm not directly involved in coding. I'm mainly make suggestions/recommendations to Shuugo and discuss any other idea we (the staff) may have. Shuugo does some simple changes while the major stuff gets deferred to the core engine coders. You'd have to head over to Yander.re to get in touch with the core engine coders. Yande.re (formerly oreno/moe.imouto.org) is the main site for development. Kona uses a customized version of that site's engine (a.k.a. the Moebooru Engine).
What i wanted to ask is not really a side improvement...
But, is it possible to change the "Add translation" button to "Add Note"?
Because:
Every translation is a note. But not every note is a translation.
What i want to say is:
It is just wrong to use the "Add translation" button for making just notes.
I hope you understand my problem.
Theres no need of changing this, but it would make the side a bit more correct.
But, is it possible to change the "Add translation" button to "Add Note"?
Because:
Every translation is a note. But not every note is a translation.
What i want to say is:
It is just wrong to use the "Add translation" button for making just notes.
I hope you understand my problem.
Theres no need of changing this, but it would make the side a bit more correct.
This would promote the use of notes for general purposes.trinkschokolade said:
What i wanted to ask is not really a side improvement...
But, is it possible to change the "Add translation" button to "Add Note"?
Because:
Every translation is a note. But not every note is a translation.
What i want to say is:
It is just wrong to use the "Add translation" button for making just notes.
I hope you understand my problem.
Theres no need of changing this, but it would make the side a bit more correct.
Although I can see the usefulness of using notes in some cases that are not translation, I don't like the idea of being massively used for "stupid"/"pointless" stuff.
Some users do that now and then anyway. At the very least, it'll be a bit more clear for normal user. If need be (if I ever get the time and motivation), I can do a FAQ entry for Note Usage at some point. It won't necessary curb stupidity, but it would help users who actually really want to help.Shuugo said:
[...] I don't like the idea of being massively used for "stupid"/"pointless" stuff.
The advantage of these translations is that they have a location/place in the image itself. What kind of situation would merit using a "translation" as a note that would be more effective than simply adding the note as a comment to the picture?
Some "translations" explain certain thjings better if placed on the image to dhow you where the item is. Not everyone will be aware of what others are talking about. And we all know some people can't explain/describe stuff in pure text form only. We have users that can barely communicate properly in their native language(s)...
Most obvious example would be noting characters in an image where readily identifying the mass of characters would be difficult. Not everyone will know all the characters on sight. Or in some cases, the chars are half-hidden and we all need to guess who is who.
Most obvious example would be noting characters in an image where readily identifying the mass of characters would be difficult. Not everyone will know all the characters on sight. Or in some cases, the chars are half-hidden and we all need to guess who is who.
Maybe a "Preview Image" feature would be nice? To show us how the image would look like uploaded to Kona, so we don't have to go back and delete it.
Correct me if I'm wrong and there is a feature like this, or has been mentioned before.
Correct me if I'm wrong and there is a feature like this, or has been mentioned before.
Huh... why a preview? The preview looks like the image... and if you would choose to not upload a picture because of how it looks in the thumbnail, you are probably not using Konachan as you should. Am I missing something else here? o_O
I'm as confused as you with that request... maybe he meant something else.SK7000 said:
Huh... why a preview? The preview looks like the image... and if you would choose to not upload a picture because of how it looks in the thumbnail, you are probably not using Konachan as you should. Am I missing something else here? o_O
What I mean is, You could preview how the image would look like after uploading, to see the thumbnail if it's too large, too tall, etc.Shuugo said:
I'm as confused as you with that request... maybe he meant something else.
If the thumbnail is too large, like the resolution going over the image, is because you didn't upload a wallpaper.Katsumi said:
What I mean is, You could preview how the image would look like after uploading, to see the thumbnail if it's too large, too tall, etc.
I know. But wouldn't it be nice to see if it appears to large, or too tall, etc., before uploading it to kona?Shuugo said:
If the thumbnail is too large, like the resolution going over the image, is because you didn't upload a wallpaper.
You can't upload anything besides images that don't fit the screen. if it doesn't fit the screen it will look bad, for example square-ish images. And if you upload something like that you are doing it wrong, this site is for images that fit desktop wallpapers.Katsumi said:
I know. But wouldn't it be nice to see if it appears to large, or too tall, etc., before uploading it to kona?
Katsumi, there's no need for a PREVIEW function just for that. If you want to be sure, use a calculator (Windows comes with one; pretty sure all OSes come with a basic one) and divide the width by he height. That's you're aspect ratio (AR). If the AR is higher than 1.15, you're pretty much safe.
More details on AR on the FAQ: Uploads page.
More details on AR on the FAQ: Uploads page.
Ah, I see. Thanks for that info.StahnAileron said:
Katsumi, there's no need for a PREVIEW function just for that. If you want to be sure, use a calculator (Windows comes with one; pretty sure all OSes come with a basic one) and divide the width by he height. That's you're aspect ratio (AR). If the AR is higher than 1.15, you're pretty much safe.
More details on AR on the FAQ: Uploads page.
One small thing I'd really appreciate is to remove the additional vertical spacing that is automatically added after every quote block. In fact, to avoid huge blank-spaces, I have to use the code as follows: <quote>Something</quote>I see what you did there. which displays as:
The more natural reply structure would be to use a separate line after the quote, like this:
<quote>Something</quote>
I see what you did there.
But this results in this huge amount of blank space between the block and the next line:
The spacing above quote blocks is fine. Can't we use that one for below, too?
I see what you did there.Something
The more natural reply structure would be to use a separate line after the quote, like this:
<quote>Something</quote>
I see what you did there.
But this results in this huge amount of blank space between the block and the next line:
I see what you did there.Something
The spacing above quote blocks is fine. Can't we use that one for below, too?
BattosaiLuffy
11 months ago