Comment Pages in S2: the old becomes new

[fu]

One of our long-running projects is to remove the old crufty code written in BML (our old templating system) and replace it with better alternatives throughout the site. And the coding for talkread.bml -- which is what is used any time you load up a site-skinned comment page -- is a particularly painful example.

Add to that, having the site-skinned comment pages be written one way, and custom comment pages another, makes it likely for one to lag behind the other. For example: site-skinned comment pages show the link for entries with screened comments as: "x visible | y screened". But S2 comment pages didn't have that information until this code push!

So I'm really happy to say that we have a new version of the comments page which uses pure S2, so now site-skinned comment pages and journal-styled comment pages are formed the same way on the backend even if they don't look the same. exor674 worked hard on the backend to make this possible, then momijizukamori came through with some spit and polish (with some help from kunzite).

The idea is for the new version to look as much as possible like the old version, though there might be a few discrepancies, because the backend is so different. momijizukamori has done her best to mimic the look and feel of the old comment pages. But the comments page is one of the most used pages here, so we'd like you all to come and give it a good shakedown.

Turn on beta testing for the "New S2 Comment Pages" -- and let us know in comments if you find anything out of the ordinary.

List of known issues.

Comments

[momijizukamori]

Oh, that's a method I hadn't thought of! Though it's generally not great practice to have a link indistinguishable from text...

But I'll definitely keep it on the table *g*

[chagrined]

DW does already do it all over the site in a lot of their journal styles, though? But if you mean like, in the case of it being the site style, I see the point. (If it's changed to the new way, for myself I'd prolly just write a stylish script to make them look how I want and all.)

(Some other things I noticed I'm gonna put in a new comment now, heh.)

[momijizukamori]

A lot of them distinguish on hover (ie, change color or the underline appears), though yeah, a few don't. And yeah, not so great to have it on site scheme - but as I said, it's definitely an option for us to consider :)

Sure...

[marahmarie]

No linkies: http://i.imgur.com/CZs98.jpg

Beta testing on: http://i.imgur.com/TN8k6.jpg

With this I can officially crown myself the queen of online errors. It never stops!

Re: Sure...

[momijizukamori]

Hmm. It actually looks like you're not getting the beta style at all - you don't have any of the differences others have reported. If you look at the source, is it a huge table, or stacked divs for the comments?

Re: Sure...

[chagrined]

I had to throw ?style=site on mine for it to show up. Even w/ beta feature on and viewing this entry which uses site style for comments, I got the old style otherwise. But I figured that was intentionally for testing or whatnot.

Re: Sure...

[fu]

Should be okay now even without the style=site!

(Nah not deliberate, thanks for pointing out the style=site thing; that made it really easy to figure out where it was going wrong)

Re: Sure...

[montuos]

Ditto here; no evidence of beta style after turning it on. Source shows divs, not table. Tried clearing cache, turning off all Greasemonkey scripts, signing out and in again, restarting browser; nothing worked but chagrined's suggestion of ?style=site. Tropo Red, Nouveau Oleanders, Firefox 15.0.1, Kubuntu 12.04. Edit: Also not seeing it in Chrome 21.0.1180.89.

Re: Sure...

[fu]

Fixed!

Re: Sure...

[marahmarie]

Fu dropped a comment below saying she fixed it (there was an error apparently that as usual, *sigh* affected me). Thanks for looking into it, though. :)

Re: Sure...

[fu]

Found it, fixed!

Re: Sure...

[marahmarie]

Fu, love you, thanks so much! :)