fu: Close-up of Fu, bringing a scoop of water to her mouth (Default)
fu ([personal profile] fu) wrote in [site community profile] dw_beta2012-03-24 01:20 pm

New JS on Journals: Last Call

We're planning on taking the "new JavaScript on journals" changes out of beta soon and making the changes the default for the entire site, so we've done a push today that adds the last few (reported) missing features, and fixes the last few (reported) really annoying behaviors.

There's always going to be one thing more though, so please make sure that you turn on beta for the new JS on journals, and tell us how that new JS works for you -- or doesn't work, if that's the case.

I'm interested in hearing about everything that's bothering you, no matter how tiny it seems! The sooner we know, the sooner we can fix it. (Just this code push, we fixed two things that seemed tiny: one was the hover menu fading way too quickly, another was how the attempt to change your poll vote would bring to you to a separate page instead of changing your vote on the page you were on. They were both things we missed at first, but once they were brought to our attention, we couldn't stop seeing them. And now they're fixed!)

So poke around, and let us know what you find. If you're looking for something to focus on, here's a short list of things we recently added or fixed:

  • added same-page comment tracking

  • fixed same-page changing of poll votes

  • added displaying errors when comment expansion fails to work

  • fixed hover menu fading away even when you didn't move your mouse

  • fixed the .cuttag-open CSS class so it applies to the contents of the opened cut tag (the way the old JS did), for people who want to customize this in their styles

  • made the bottom arrow jump you to the top of the cut tag, without affecting page forward/back

Assuming there are no major issues, we'll turn on the "new JS on journals" beta flag for everyone with our next code push for one last round of testing with the whole site, not just the people who've turned on the beta version. We'll keep it as a beta option at that point, so if anyone has serious problems, they can disable the beta and go back to the old JS while we fix the problem. After that, we'll take this code out of beta and make it the standard option for everyone, removing the old (existing) JavaScript entirely. So, if something's wrong, speak up now!
lethe1: (lom: synchronised policing)

[personal profile] lethe1 2012-03-25 05:44 pm (UTC)(link)
Yes, I have Javascript enabled on both Safari and Firefox, and I don't use any extensions.
denise: Image: Me, facing away from camera, on top of the Castel Sant'Angelo in Rome (Default)

[staff profile] denise 2012-03-25 06:04 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh, well -- thanks for the info anyway! One last "rule out the little stuff first" type thing: can you try clearing your browser cache, then restarting both your computer and your browser and trying again?

Unfortunately, we can't guarantee that we'll fix this, since we do only support the most recent versions of the Big Five (Firefox, Safari, Chrome, IE, and Opera) and one version back on everything but Opera; both Firefox 1.0 and Safari 1.3 were released in 2003. If it turns out to be an easy fix that's very obvious we may be able to do something, but I won't guarantee it, and I can't say how much time and effort we'll be able to put into troubleshooting or tracking down the root cause. :(

I am truly the last person in the world to advocate updating software that you're 100% happy with (I am still using a chat client that was discontinued in 2005 because I hate the user interface of every other chat client I've tried, and I'm using the same irc client that I first started using in 1996 or so) but if you're able to update to more recent versions, you may want to consider it. I'm guessing you're using an older operating system, which likely means you can't update Safari, but it might be worth trying the 3.6.X line of Firefox if it will run on your system. I know this is not always an option, and you don't need to explain to me why if it isn't possible! I'm just throwing that out there as a possibility, since I do feel bad that we can't support older versions of browsers all the way back to the beginning.

(For amusement's sake, I once turned on an old computer and tried getting Netscape 2.0 -- the browser I was using in 1995 or so -- to run with the modern internet. It was hysterical.)
lethe1: (buffering)

[personal profile] lethe1 2012-03-25 07:02 pm (UTC)(link)
No, clearing the caches didn't help. Thanks anyway, though :)

Oh well, it's just another reminder that I really should buy a new laptop. (It's just that I don't wannaaaaaa! I love my sleek Natasha, but unfortunately she's too old to upgrade.)

A year ago it became impossible for me to download the software to file my tax return online, so I had to do it at work. I told myself that I should buy a new computer within a year. Now a year has passed and taxes are once again upon us, and no new laptop has been bought, so once more I have to file at work. *sigh*

I try to tell myself that a nice shiny new laptop with lots of space will be worth the hassle of having to install everything again. I'm getting there. Eventually. :)

*takes a moment to mourn Netspace*
denise: Image: Me, facing away from camera, on top of the Castel Sant'Angelo in Rome (Default)

[staff profile] denise 2012-03-25 07:06 pm (UTC)(link)
As a fellow "I won't upgrade and you're not gonna make me" person, I feel your pain. :)
lethe1: (lom: arrgh!!)

[personal profile] lethe1 2012-03-25 07:21 pm (UTC)(link)
Thanks :)

And of course I meant Netscape, not Netspace, argh.