I have tried it by changing pref.dm like such;

_formatoption_ {
<td>_textformat_</td>
<td><select name="v" onChange="updatev();">
 <option value="0"selected>_textgraphical_
 <option value="1"selected>_texttextual_
 <option value="2"selected>_textcsstextual_
</select></td>
}

english.dm ;

_textcsstextual_ {cssTextual}

-but it doesn't stick - I get the option - but it always assumes graphical when the page reloads.

I think it is the receptionist doing this (correct me if I am wrong)

the javascript is

function updatev () {
 value = document.PrefForm.v.options[document.PrefForm.v.selectedIndex].value;
 href = location.href;
 if (href.match(/&v=d/)) href = href.replace(/&v=d/, "&v=" + value);
 else href += "&v=" + value;
 location.href = href + getargs();
}

(From pref.dm)

does anyone know how I can get past this problem.

s.

_________________________________________________
Stephen De Gabrielle
Digitisation Officer
AraDA Project

Northern Territory University Library
http://www.ntu.edu.au/library
Tel: (08) 8946 7009 from overseas: 61 8 8946 7009
Postal address: P.O.Box 41246, Casuarina, NT, 0811, Australia
CRICOS Provider No: 00300K

 
"Gordon Paynter" <gordon.paynter@ucr.edu>
Sent by: greenstone-devel-bounces@list.scms.waikato.ac.nz
10/05/2003 11:18 AM MST
Please respond to gordon.paynter

To: <greenstone-devel@orc.cs.waikato.ac.nz>
cc:
bcc:
Subject: Re: [greenstone-devel] CSS for GS interface

Stephen De Gabrielle wrote:
> I am also working on using CSS to replace the rollover menus, with the
> goal of making pages with less images, that also 'degrade gracefully' on
> older browsers. This would also remove the need for javascript to create
> rollovers, and the need for the less attractive text mode. How does the
> development team feel about this?  I am getting close and would like to
> submit the changes as a patch (a CSS file and changes to some macro
> files).

Disc: not really actively developing anymore.

This sounds like a great idea (No Javascript?  I'm sold!) and something
I've often wantesd to do myself, but I've always been hestitant about
making big changes to the interface like this.  Greenstone runs on a lot
of platforms, some of which are very old and need that text mode, and we
don't want to have to debug all of them.

One way around this that I have thought about though is extending the
text/graphics mode flag in the macro files.  From memory, macros can be
marked [v=0] for text and [v=1] for graphics, and this can be set in
preferences or as a default in the main.cfg file.

Can anyone say how difficult it would be to set it up so that [v=2]
indicated a "modern web browser" interface, where we could develop a CSS
version.  This would let us include a new interface without sacrificing
the old one, yet anyone who wanted to use the new one could simply switch
over by updating their main.cfg.


Does anyone know if the [v=N] flag can be given any value, or is it only 0
or 1?  Is there any other reason this scheme wouldn't work?

Gordon




_______________________________________________
greenstone-devel mailing list
greenstone-devel@list.scms.waikato.ac.nz
https://list.scms.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/greenstone-devel

_________________________________________________
Stephen De Gabrielle
Digitisation Officer
AraDA Project

Northern Territory University Library
http://www.ntu.edu.au/library
Tel: (08) 8946 7009 from overseas: 61 8 8946 7009
Postal address: P.O.Box 41246, Casuarina, NT, 0811, Australia
CRICOS Provider No: 00300K

 
"Gordon Paynter" <gordon.paynter@ucr.edu>
Sent by: greenstone-devel-bounces@list.scms.waikato.ac.nz
10/05/2003 11:18 AM MST
Please respond to gordon.paynter

To: <greenstone-devel@orc.cs.waikato.ac.nz>
cc:
bcc:
Subject: Re: [greenstone-devel] CSS for GS interface

Stephen De Gabrielle wrote:
> I am also working on using CSS to replace the rollover menus, with the
> goal of making pages with less images, that also 'degrade gracefully' on
> older browsers. This would also remove the need for javascript to create
> rollovers, and the need for the less attractive text mode. How does the
> development team feel about this?  I am getting close and would like to
> submit the changes as a patch (a CSS file and changes to some macro
> files).

Disc: not really actively developing anymore.

This sounds like a great idea (No Javascript?  I'm sold!) and something
I've often wantesd to do myself, but I've always been hestitant about
making big changes to the interface like this.  Greenstone runs on a lot
of platforms, some of which are very old and need that text mode, and we
don't want to have to debug all of them.

One way around this that I have thought about though is extending the
text/graphics mode flag in the macro files.  From memory, macros can be
marked [v=0] for text and [v=1] for graphics, and this can be set in
preferences or as a default in the main.cfg file.

Can anyone say how difficult it would be to set it up so that [v=2]
indicated a "modern web browser" interface, where we could develop a CSS
version.  This would let us include a new interface without sacrificing
the old one, yet anyone who wanted to use the new one could simply switch
over by updating their main.cfg.


Does anyone know if the [v=N] flag can be given any value, or is it only 0
or 1?  Is there any other reason this scheme wouldn't work?

Gordon




_______________________________________________
greenstone-devel mailing list
greenstone-devel@list.scms.waikato.ac.nz
https://list.scms.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/greenstone-devel