Well, at any rate, if this happens it's not gonna be for at least two years, so no use worrying about it haha
For now, switching pages with arrow keys could be nice.
@Crazy4cs Unlike FB, where all old posts are pretty much useless, forums do need pagination. Interested about how do you intent google to crawl all of your content since, AFAIK, google doesn't follow JS.
(2013-01-02, 06:53 AM)Omar G. Wrote: [ -> ]@Crazy4cs Unlike FB, where all old posts are pretty much useless, forums do need pagination. Interested about how do you intent google to crawl all of your content since, AFAIK, google doesn't follow JS.
FYI I'm not interested at all about arrow keys navigation.
About Google issue, perhaps MyBB could make it's own default sitemap like Google SEO does and Google should be able to crawl with the help of submitted sitemap URLs.
(2013-01-02, 07:23 AM)crazy4cs Wrote: [ -> ] (2013-01-02, 06:53 AM)Omar G. Wrote: [ -> ]@Crazy4cs Unlike FB, where all old posts are pretty much useless, forums do need pagination. Interested about how do you intent google to crawl all of your content since, AFAIK, google doesn't follow JS.
FYI I'm not interested at all about arrow keys navigation.
About Google issue, perhaps MyBB could make it's own default sitemap like Google SEO does and Google should be able to crawl with the help of submitted sitemap URLs.
I don't understand how you could be "not interested". You use it or you don't.
Okay, so I'm typing something in the quick reply. I realise that I've made a mistake a few words back so I hit the left key to move the caret back. To my dismay, the browser instead navigates to a previous page, trashing my post.
No thanks.
(2013-01-01, 02:13 PM)JordanMussi Wrote: [ -> ]If it was the left and right ones that shouldn't interfere with scrolling.
And if you need to do horizontal scrolling?
(2013-01-01, 05:21 PM)dragonexpert Wrote: [ -> ]If you use something like LIMIT x, y it still has to scan the full table
Not always true - depends on how well you've indexed the table and also the complexity of your query.
(2013-01-01, 10:49 PM)Fábio Maia Wrote: [ -> ]Pagination was not as good of an idea to begin with. The only reason pagination was adopted is because something like infinite scrolling was not possible in the early years of the internet.
Plenty of problems with these infinite scrollers. Luckily I have NoScript to block them when they piss me off.
I know people generally don't care about those small links at the bottom of most webpages, but I've had cases when I was actually interested in clicking one, where the automatic loading of images made this task rather difficult.
Or perhaps that browsers these days already consume way too much RAM - I don't need huge amounts of irrelevant posts loaded into memory and a tiny scrollbar.
Or maybe I like search engines to crawl my forum, which typically don't crawl these dynamically loading pages well.
And in the end, if you want to cater for the NoScript hippies like me, you'll have to implement pagination anyway, so it's not like you can get away without it.
I'd much prefer a manual "load more" button than some automatically loading crap.
You'll probably find that, in the end, however, a page jumper to be much more convenient to get to where you want.
(2013-01-04, 11:00 PM)Yumi Wrote: [ -> ]Okay, so I'm typing something in the quick reply. I realise that I've made a mistake a few words back so I hit the left key to move the caret back. To my dismay, the browser instead navigates to a previous page, trashing my post.
No thanks.
(2013-01-01, 02:13 PM)JordanMussi Wrote: [ -> ]If it was the left and right ones that shouldn't interfere with scrolling.
And if you need to do horizontal scrolling?
(2013-01-01, 05:21 PM)dragonexpert Wrote: [ -> ]If you use something like LIMIT x, y it still has to scan the full table
Not always true - depends on how well you've indexed the table and also the complexity of your query.
(2013-01-01, 10:49 PM)Fábio Maia Wrote: [ -> ]Pagination was not as good of an idea to begin with. The only reason pagination was adopted is because something like infinite scrolling was not possible in the early years of the internet.
Plenty of problems with these infinite scrollers. Luckily I have NoScript to block them when they piss me off.
I know people generally don't care about those small links at the bottom of most webpages, but I've had cases when I was actually interested in clicking one, where the automatic loading of images made this task rather difficult.
Or perhaps that browsers these days already consume way too much RAM - I don't need huge amounts of irrelevant posts loaded into memory and a tiny scrollbar.
Or maybe I like search engines to crawl my forum, which typically don't crawl these dynamically loading pages well.
And in the end, if you want to cater for the NoScript hippies like me, you'll have to implement pagination anyway, so it's not like you can get away without it.
I'd much prefer a manual "load more" button than some automatically loading crap.
You'll probably find that, in the end, however, a page jumper to be much more convenient to get to where you want.
I completely agree. There's times like this when I'm on Google images and I need to access advanced search and whatnot. I like the idea of a load more button.