Image attachment thumbnails are broken when previewed. From what I understand this problem is common and has existed for quite some time, however it has remained unaddressed by the developers. Does anyone know of a plugin or a workaround to correct this defect? The forum I operate is image-intensive and a shortcoming as basic but substantial as this is unacceptable for a script as popular as MyBB. Had I known about it in advance and not spent so much time designing a template only to discover it, I'd have chosen a different script.
What are you referring to? You mean if you upload an attachment then hit Preview Post?
This is because the image isn't yet uploaded to the server where it is web accessible, so technically it doesn't even exist. You can't show what doesn't exist.
(2012-01-30, 08:10 AM)Nathan Malcolm Wrote: [ -> ]What are you referring to? You mean if you upload an attachment then hit Preview Post?
This is because the image isn't yet uploaded to the server where it is web accessible, so technically it doesn't even exist. You can't show what doesn't exist.
That is indeed what I'm referring to. Upon uploading an image, it's on the server. What can be done to make images accessible when a post is previewed? PHPBB, VBulletin and other forum scripts don't suffer from this shortcoming, so it's clearly technically feasible.
I believe they either upload the attachment directly to the forum, even if the post isn't posted (Which would just take up more diskspace) or upload it to a temporary web accessible directory to be shown.
The latter would be the best option but I'm not so sure if Tom wants to go ahead and implement such a big change for one little feature.
I'll have a snoop around the development site and see if I can find a ticket relating to this.
(2012-01-30, 08:22 AM)Nathan Malcolm Wrote: [ -> ]I believe they either upload the attachment directly to the forum, even if the post isn't posted (Which would just take up more diskspace) or upload it to a temporary web accessible directory to be shown.
The latter would be the best option but I'm not so sure if Tom wants to go ahead and implement such a big change for one little feature.
I'll have a snoop around the development site and see if I can find a ticket relating to this.
Thanks Nathan, I appreciate that. Sorry if my posts sounded a bit aggressive, I'm just a little frustrated.
See
[Issue #765].
I can't see this being implemented until 2.0. As we're rewriting it I'm inclined to say that would be the best option.