***Forum functionality poll***

[ttweed]

Hi all-

Curt has recruited me to help Steve G. out with forum admin duties, and this is my first visible task, so be gentle with me, please! There is one issue that bugs me about this PCA-SDR forum that I would like to get member feedback on--namely the way that the forum software responds when you click on a hot-link embedded in a posting.

The current configuration of the phpBB software that powers this forum reacts when you click on an embedded link by opening the target page in the same browser window you are using to browse the forum postings. I am a member of several other forums (Rennlist, Pelican Parts, and the Early 911S Registry, for instance) that react differently--they open the link in a new browser window (or a new tab) while preserving your place in the original forum posting you were reading when you clicked on the link. For me, this is a more functional way to act, as I often want to go back and review the original posting, or proceed to read more of the thread, without hitting the "Back" arrow and leaving the linked site.

While I know that I can right-click on the link and open a menu that gives me a choice to open a new browser window (or a new tab) to visit the target site, I often forget to do this on our PCA forum because I have gotten in the habit of just left-clicking the link from using the other forums I frequent.

By voting on this poll, we can find out what the majority preference is for this action, and perhaps change the default response of the software to make the forum more user-friendly, if that is reflected in the voting.

I made this thread a "sticky" post for 20 days to allow everyone to find it and register their preference easily.

Thx,
TT

[LUCKY DAVE]

Yes, change it please .
The current setting is annoying as it's different from any other forum.

[Kim Crosser]

Concur - click link should open a new window.

While we are on the topic of forum changes - we used to have a "next topic" link, I believe, before the last big forum upgrade. While the new forum is very nice, I would really like to be able to click a link from within a thread and go to the next newer thread (or next unread thread). Having to go back to "General Discussions" in order to go to the next thread in the same forum is a bit of an annoyance.

[pdy]

Yes, agree - automatically a new window.

[ChuckS]

+1

[JERRY B]

+1

[Dan Chambers]

New window opens on embedded link, please.

[John Straub]

Yes, thanks Tom.

John

[RickK]

new window please.

[MR LIPP]

I LOVE the combined Announcement and General Discussion plan!

[mcm92122]

All new browsers support tabbed browsing - instead of a new window - open it in a new tab.

[Bill Behun]

I prefer the proposed solution - even knowing I can open it in a new tab.

[MikeD]

I was just informed this poll was here. The idea is nice. However, it is not just a simple option change. This forum software confirms to the W3C standards on this topic, and because of that there is no way to just "turn this on". It requires code level changes to the software. Which in turn make upgrades and maintenance more time consuming and error prone.

I understand the desire to open pages in a new window (or tab). And, as far as I know, all modern browses allow you to CTRL+click (on Linux or Windows) or CMD+click (on Mac) to open a link in a new Window (or tab). While I understand people have become accustomed to this behavior over the years. I do believe the W3C was correct in its reasoning, which was to give as much control to the user as possible.

[galis]

I was just informed this poll was here. The idea is nice. However, it is not just a simple option change. This forum software confirms to the W3C standards on this topic, and because of that there is no way to just "turn this on". It requires code level changes to the software. Which in turn make upgrades and maintenance more time consuming and error prone.

I understand the desire to open pages in a new window (or tab). And, as far as I know, all modern browses allow you to CTRL+click (on Linux or Windows) or CMD+click (on Mac) to open a link in a new Window (or tab). While I understand people have become accustomed to this behavior over the years. I do believe the W3C was correct in its reasoning, which was to give as much control to the user as possible.

Awh, that sounds kinda heavy handed. Opening external links in a new window is of unanimous interest in this poll (browsers have an option to do this by tabs). It's a big convenience for efficiently browsing the forum. When you multiply the number of people, by the number of links, by 2 for the CTRL/CMD+click method, that's a LOT of clicks which could be cut in half! Here is a fix in 17 clicks. Set the target variable at the part of code which changes plain text to clickable links. I will find it and send a patch if you like. It is done by setting target="_blank" in the anchor tag. Like so:

<a href="./" target="_blank">Open this page in a new window.</a>

Also, the feature IS supported by the W3C! I made an example, which also has a W3C validator built in... http://iuxta.com/tmp/

As far as upgrades and maintenance; the software is for the users and this is a reasonable request. It really is hard to CTRL/CMD+click while eating a burrito. At at some point in the upgrade cycle if this fix doesn't make it in I will be happy to provide another patch and if that doesn't pan out we can just default to the status quo.

[ttweed]

Also, the feature IS supported by the W3C!

George-
Because it is supported does not mean it is recommended. If you look at the W3C standards, you will see the following about limiting the opening of new links in windows or tabs:
The objective of this technique is to limit the use of links or buttons that open new windows or tabs within Web content. In general, it is better not to open new windows and tabs since they can be disorienting for people, especially people who have difficulty perceiving visual content. However there are some situations where it is preferable from an accessibility perspective to open a new window or tab. Here are two such situations:

1. Opening a page containing context-sensitive information, such as help instructions, or an alternate means of completing a form, such as a calendar-based date picker, will significantly disrupt a multi-step workflow, such as filling in and submitting a form, if the page is opened in the same window or tab.
2. The user is logged into a secured site, and following a link to a page outside of the secured scope would terminate the user's logon. In this case opening external links in an external window allows the user to access such references while keeping their login active in the original window.


The developers of the phpBB software made a conscious decision to follow these guidelines, since this forum software does not meet either of the exceptions given. The objective is to allow the user to control their web experience and not have the websites they visit take that control away from them. Read this article for further explanation.

As far as upgrades and maintenance; the software is for the users and this is a reasonable request.

When I started this poll, I was unaware of these standards and thought that making the change was a simple "off/on" selection of an option in the administration panel. Since talking to Mike more extensively and researching the issue, I have to say that I must defer to his wishes in this matter for several reasons:

1. While the forum software can be modified to support this feature, it requires manual modification of the code in three different areas of the program. See this article:
http://www.phpbb.com/kb/article/links-opening-new-windows/ Note that even after the modification is done, it will only effect new posts--none of the previously posted links will be activated to open a new tab! This will create an unacceptably confusing situation for users where some posts (the newer ones) will respond in one way and others (the older ones) will not. This is the "dealbreaker" for me. Such inconsistency would be maddening. If I had known this when I opened this poll, I never would have posted it.

2. Since the developers are not likely to modify the future versions of the software to support this feature, all three patches will have to be applied in any future updates of the program that are issued down the line, perhaps more, if the program changes in ways we can't anticipate. This will turn a 5-minute automated task into a 2-3 hour manual operation for Mike to implement each upgrade. Since he is hosting and maintaining this forum on his own server, on his own dime, volunteering his time, resources and expertise to offer this venue to the club for open discussion (which i think we all appreciate tremendously), I cannot agree that it is "reasonable" to expect him to take even more time out of his busy schedule to do this, especially since it is not possible to offer a "complete" solution to the problem, as noted above. The best thing for us to do at this point is to control our own user experience by using the "right-click" or "ctrl-click" function in our browsers to have the link open in a new window or tab.

Nothing is ever as clear-cut and simple in this world as we might wish, I'm afraid.
TT