Author Topic: New NSF Feedback Thread (Read 476744 times)

sanman · « **Reply #640 on:** 04/22/2016 07:04 am »

Regarding the mobile version of this site, whenever I click on a thread to look at it, then it always brings me to the first page of the thread. However, when I browse the regular version of the site from my PC, then when I click on a thread it brings me to the last page, which is the behavior I like. Is there any way to get the mobile site to behave similarly, to save on clicks?

Sorry, it's a minor thing - I just thought I'd mention it.

watermod · « **Reply #641 on:** 04/22/2016 02:44 pm »

Quote from: gospacex on 04/21/2016 06:25 pm

Quote from: gospacex on 12/02/2013 11:45 am
I saved a thread page locally and looked at resulting .html file.
Found this fragment:


<div id="page_wrapper">
<div id="wrapper" style="width: 1080px">
<header>

Deleted style="width: 1080px" thing, saved the file and reloaded the file. The blue left/right margins are now gone.

Is there any chance you guys can take a look into this? Why forum artificially limits the width of its pages?

https://goo.gl/photos/sdnQgGWjWj7R3oTy6 on linux same display as gospace

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #642 on:** 04/22/2016 02:48 pm »

This is how it looks to me....to show it's actually normal (gospacex's isnt really, but his monitor looks like a square but check out the second post)

First - border is normal.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #643 on:** 04/22/2016 02:49 pm »

Google Chrome to 110 percent - less border.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #644 on:** 04/22/2016 02:50 pm »

To 125 percent. Witchcraft! There's no border.

So it's browser settings, not the site. Gospacex, can you do anything with that?

control and + to decrease border.

gospacex · « **Reply #645 on:** 04/22/2016 06:20 pm »

Quote from: Chris Bergin on 04/22/2016 02:48 pm

This is how it looks to me....to show it's actually normal (gospacex's isnt really, but his monitor looks like a square but check out the second post)

First - border is normal.

Your image also shows the border (the dark blue field on both sides). You also have it, it's not my machine or browser.

What purpose that border is serving? Taking up screen space?
Well, one might say, what's the deal? The messages are still visible, so?

Let me show you a screenshot of "SpaceX Manifest Updates and Discussion Thread 3" thread, which has post with a wide table.

What do we see here? The blue border on the left is still happily eating 20% of screen width, while the table doesn't fit. Nice...

Quote

To 125 percent. Witchcraft! There's no border.

Yep. Works for me too. Border is gone. But the width of the message boxes is the same when measured in characters, just everything (characters and boxes) are now bigger. And the thread with the table still doesn't fit, it is just bigger now.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #646 on:** 04/22/2016 08:09 pm »

You've got me a bit stumped as it's all super duper in Chrome (Windows 10, but was on the others) and it stretches the text in tandem. Only a problem when you go to a silly small size....but that's the opposite of what you want.

Have you tried playing with text size after altering the "zoom" to remove a border for you?

And yes, the border is designed, so we are talking about cheating for your preference.

gospacex · « **Reply #647 on:** 04/27/2016 07:15 pm »

Well, if you want to keep the border, it means nothing will change, I can as well just live with it.

the_other_Doug · « **Reply #648 on:** 04/28/2016 05:49 pm »

I know this has been complained about before, but not for a while. Search doesn't work for squat.

The Search function needs to start supporting Boolean functions, or at least support searching for a specific search string. As it is, if I want to find posts about Apollo 16, for example (which is what I was trying to do), all you get is every instance of the word Apollo plus every non-related instance of the numbers 1 and 6.

It's not a problem unique to this forum, but it makes the search function completely useless. Which gets frustrating -- you literally might as well just go back ten years and start plowing through everything anyone has ever posted if you want to find anything. And when some people get snippy and say "That's already been discussed, go look it up" you just want to take your computer and apply energetically to that guy's head...

Isn't there even a way to make things typed in quotes exact search strings, and return only results which exactly match that string? It's not as hard as coding Boolean functions, I wouldn't think, and would actually make the forums searchable.

Sorry if I'm sounding short, I found out about five hours ago that I get to have another very unplanned surgery in the next hour or so, and I imagine that's not giving me a lot of patience for trying to use a search function that's broken while I wait here in the ER to be rolled up to face the scalpels. Sort of puts a fine edge on the frustration...

HammerD · « **Reply #649 on:** 04/28/2016 06:03 pm »

Since maybe about 1.5 months the site does not load properly on the Blackberry Z30 web browser. For several years it was totally fine, the website loaded perfect, then all of a sudden it stopped working. Images don't load, the page layout is all wrong.

Lar · « **Reply #650 on:** 04/28/2016 06:44 pm »

I just tested this and Doug's right, the search function is pants, if you put in "apollo 16" (in quotes) it shows you every post that mentions 2016 in the body (or every different topic that has 16 in it if you restrict to subject lines)... this despite the example showing using quotes.

What about just suggesting that folks use Google to search? Except for L2, it's all publicly searchable... I suspect actually fixing search would be something that the forum software developer folks have to do, it's not like there's a configuration switch in the forum software that you choose between "naff", "middling ok" and "awesome" search behavior that Chris or our fine admins can change.

(or if there is I'm in the wrong line of work)

Retired Downrange · « **Reply #651 on:** 04/28/2016 07:03 pm »

The syntax for Google search of the forums is as follows

"apollo 16" site:forum.nasaspaceflight.com

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #652 on:** 04/28/2016 07:52 pm »

Hmm, no idea about that, HammerD. I'll have to defer that to clever folk.

Nice tip on the google search. I think Search became overwhelmed by the size of the forum. I do, however, find the search bar in the top of individual sections pretty good. The main search in the top bar of the forum menu seems to just act like "OMG, I have to search through ALL of those posts?"

IanO · « **Reply #653 on:** 04/29/2016 04:49 pm »

There is missing information in the "Upcoming Calendar" section in the "Info Center" section at the bottom of the Forum home page. Each event lists the launch window in UTC, but omits the launch date!

Also, the multiple events are all in one paragraph, but a list would be better, or a paragraph for each event.

kch · « **Reply #654 on:** 04/29/2016 05:11 pm »

Quote from: Lar on 04/28/2016 06:44 pm

I just tested this and Doug's right, the search function is pants, if you put in "apollo 16" (in quotes) it shows you every post that mentions 2016 in the body (or every different topic that has 16 in it if you restrict to subject lines)... this despite the example showing using quotes.

"Pants"?

Lar · « **Reply #655 on:** 04/29/2016 05:15 pm »

Quote from: kch on 04/29/2016 05:11 pm

Quote from: Lar on 04/28/2016 06:44 pm
I just tested this and Doug's right, the search function is pants, if you put in "apollo 16" (in quotes) it shows you every post that mentions 2016 in the body (or every different topic that has 16 in it if you restrict to subject lines)... this despite the example showing using quotes.

"Pants"?

Quote

UK slang - not useful or of bad quality: This music is pants.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/pants

Chris is from the UK and I snuck some UK slang in there to see if he'd comment. Either he didn't notice or chose not to

... it's definitely not something you hear people in the US say much unless they are anglophiles (raises hand) or from the UK.

WulfTheSaxon · « **Reply #656 on:** 04/29/2016 09:57 pm »

Quote from: gospacex on 04/27/2016 07:15 pm

Well, if you want to keep the border, it means nothing will change, I can as well just live with it.

The width is limited to 1080 pixels to make it easier for your eyes to track between lines. Of course, optimum line length is defined in degrees or minutes of arc rather than centimeters – much less pixels. So, depending on the resolution and size of your monitor, and even how far you sit from it, the ideal length in pixels varies. If your viewing scenario really warrants it, you can download the Stylish extension and save this as a userstyle:


@-moz-document domain("forum.nasaspaceflight.com") {
#wrapper {width: auto !important;}
}

There’s also the about:config preference layout.css.devPixelsPerPx. You can either set it to your physical dpi divided by 96, or get fancy and calculate the value you’d need in order for each pixel to make up 0.0213° of your vision given however far away you typically sit – the measurement of a “reference pixel” in CSS3. Either way, you might want to round it to a whole number for the best results.

the_other_Doug · « **Reply #657 on:** 05/05/2016 04:44 am »

Quote from: Lar on 04/29/2016 05:15 pm

Quote from: kch on 04/29/2016 05:11 pm
Quote from: Lar on 04/28/2016 06:44 pm
I just tested this and Doug's right, the search function is pants, if you put in "apollo 16" (in quotes) it shows you every post that mentions 2016 in the body (or every different topic that has 16 in it if you restrict to subject lines)... this despite the example showing using quotes.

"Pants"?

Quote
UK slang - not useful or of bad quality: This music is pants.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/pants

Chris is from the UK and I snuck some UK slang in there to see if he'd comment. Either he didn't notice or chose not to ... it's definitely not something you hear people in the US say much unless they are anglophiles (raises hand) or from the UK.

I learn so much from this forum...

And, BTW, my re-appearance after five days away fairly obviously shows that the emergency surgery I referenced in my post went as well as such things can go. I'm back home, on pain meds, and off work for the next month or so. Which is, I guess, a warning...

Lar · « **Reply #658 on:** 05/06/2016 02:39 pm »

Thanks for living, Doug, it's much appreciated!

meanwhile, this post came up in another thread

Quote from: CorvusCorax on 05/06/2016 11:52 am

Quote from: Chris Bergin on 05/06/2016 05:11 am
Per the JCSAT-14 webcast, the testing for CRS-8 S1 is still "39A or McGregor" - so nothing finalized yet.

(t=790, 13:10 in video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0bMeDj76ig&t=790

Q to mods: how do I add a link to youtube in a forum post - with correct time stamp? every time I add a youtube URL, it actually embeds the video but without the timestamp

We probably should ask the tech boffins for help on this to see if they can figure out what isn't working, being able to go directly to a spot is really helpful...

gospacex · « **Reply #659 on:** 05/06/2016 04:43 pm »

Quote from: WulfTheSaxon on 04/29/2016 09:57 pm

Quote from: gospacex on 04/27/2016 07:15 pm
Well, if you want to keep the border, it means nothing will change, I can as well just live with it.

The width is limited to 1080 pixels to make it easier for your eyes to track between lines. Of course, optimum line length is defined in degrees or minutes of arc rather than centimeters – much less pixels.

It would make more sense to assume that the user of the monitor did choose the monitor with width that suits his reading habits/abilities.