Skip to content

Fancybox now used for image handling

Announcements


13/16

6 Oct 2023, 16:11


Threaded Replies

Related Topics
  • 15 Votes
    16 Posts
    757 Views
    @phenomlab of course, to be recognised is fantastic. @phenomlab said in Ch..ch..ch..ch..changes!: Sadly, no. Web crawlers and scrapers are often JS based and read text only, so styles don’t have any bearing. I’ve read mixed things about this, but no that does make sense, it was something I read a many years back when using Wordpress.
  • 8 Votes
    7 Posts
    441 Views
    I’ve noticed that I’m the only one subscribed to the push notifications on this site. If you were using NTFY previously, and have noticed that you’ve not had any alerts for a while, it’s because this feature has been disabled. You’ll now need to use the push notification to replace NTFY as mentioned in the first post.
  • 0 Votes
    2 Posts
    145 Views
    @DownPW Technically, it should be possible with the addition of the below Toolbar: { display: { left: ["infobar"], middle: [ "zoomIn", "zoomOut", "toggle1to1", "rotateCCW", "rotateCW", "flipX", "flipY", ], right: ["slideshow", "thumbs", "close"], }, }, Meaning your code block becomes function fancybox() { if (top.location.pathname !== '/login') { $(document).ready(function() { $('a').not('.forum-logo').not(".avatar").not(".emoji").not(".bmac-noanimate").each(function() { $('a[href*=".jpg"], a[href*=".jpeg"], a[href*=".png"], a[href*=".gif"], a[href*=".webp"], a[href*=".svg"]').addClass("noanimate"); }); }); Fancybox.bind( 'a[href*=".jpg"], a[href*=".jpeg"], a[href*=".png"], a[href*=".gif"], a[href*=".webp"], a[href*=".svg"]', { Toolbar: { display: { left: ["infobar"], middle: [ "zoomIn", "zoomOut", "toggle1to1", "rotateCCW", "rotateCW", "flipX", "flipY", ], right: ["slideshow", "thumbs", "close"], }, }, } ); } } Note, that you just need to add/remove the elements in the toolbar you do not need. Obviously, zoomIn and zoomOut are the ones you are specifically interested in. However, if Fancybox detects that the image has already been zoomed as far as possible, then this will not work. You’d need an external library such as zoom.js to add this functionality, or perhaps simpler https://www.jacklmoore.com/zoom/ A good example of how you’d make these two independent libraries work together is below https://codepen.io/ezra_siton/pen/VgrjKw It’s worth nothing that this specific code is based on Fancybox 3, so may need to be refactored to work with the latest version 5.
  • 6 Votes
    4 Posts
    585 Views
    @DownPW Always looking for ways to improve the overall experience.
  • 7 Votes
    9 Posts
    871 Views
    @crazycells that’s as good a test as any
  • 6 Votes
    4 Posts
    427 Views
    @cagatay these changes aren’t published anywhere presently, so nothing for you to do.
  • 16 Votes
    21 Posts
    2k Views
    I relented somewhat here and added another swatch - one I missed, which was previous called “blackout”. This specific one has been adapted to work on the new theming engine, but the others have been reclassified, and renamed to suit. [image: 1693924764891-d7f3a7a1-9702-4238-99bd-5c0e0d53f244-image.png] As a result, the theme you might have had will probably be reflecting something else, so you (might) need to change your themes accordingly. The changes are as follows Light -> No Change Cloudy -> Is now the old “Dim” Dim -> Is now the old “Dark” Dark -> Now a new theme based on the revamped “Blackout”
  • 5 Votes
    2 Posts
    632 Views
    Just coming back to this thread for review (as I often do), and it looks like Webdock have increased their available offerings - some are extremely powerful, yet very competitive from the pricing perspective. [image: 1692559685163-7cf9a928-ac21-44fe-99c6-90439030d631-image.png] 10 CPU cores, plus 20Gb RAM? Well worth a look (and the asking price) - there’s also a fixed IP which is hugely beneficial. Clearly, this is well beyond what most people will want to spend - it’s more of an example (but interestingly, Sudonix runs on something not too different from the above). However, not all that glitters is gold - just have a walk through the benchmark report I found below and you’ll see a huge difference between Heztner and Webdock https://www.vpsbenchmarks.com/compare/hetzner_vs_webdock That being said, the amount of HTTP requests that Webdock handles in relation to Hetzner is superior - @DownPW you might want to have a look at this - there’s a free 24 hour trial… [image: 1692560710486-5203639b-2f62-47e6-b87b-37580ce5deae-image.png]