|
Hi Cam, thanks for the additional feedback!
You could simply use the letter PV or the already used term "roundfender" to help identify the gallery.
I like "roundfender" so I have gone ahead and set up the base install of the gallery using that title.
Will the gallery be "read enabled" to allow other, non-registered users to access the albums?
By default I've got it set to all anyone with internet access to view all albums and all sizes of images. I can reset the defaults to restrict access if this is a concern though, and I think each user should be able to "hide" albums, password protect albums, and restrict viewing of specific sized versions of images. (I haven't tested out the registered user accounts yet, so I'm not sure exactly how much control they are given yet.)
Will you enforce a maximum image size; ie 800 x 600, to conserve space, encourage consistency and comply with most browsers and screen resolutions?
I was planning on making a max dimension of 1600 pixels wide/high, which should be more than adequate for any web-use. I might be more inclined to reduce that max dimension to 1024 pixels (to save some space), if you guys don't mind though. The software will automatically resize the image if it is too large, and it seems to do a pretty decent job of it. I was also planning on setting a 640-pixel "default size" which would be the default shown size of an image when that image is selected. There would be options for the viewer to see it in "original" (or full) size as well though.
Will you only support the most common image file formats; JPG and GIF, or are all formats including video supported?
It supports JPEG, GIF, and PNG files by default, and I've installed a module that is supposed to let it support some common video files. I haven't had the opportunity to test it out yet though. Allegedly, all of the following file types/extensions are supported: pdf, psd, ai, eps, ps, svg, tga, pcd, ppm, pjpeg, png, tif, tiff, ppm, gif, jpg, jpeg, jpe, png, wbmp, mpe, mpeg, mpg, mov, qt, asf, wmv, avi.
Will you be implementing meta data tags or XML to allow Internet search robots to index these pages and our included text?
I haven't decided on a policy for search engine inclusion/exclusion just yet. I can probably go either way on this, depending on what you guys prefer.
I agree to not enable Javascript, but simple HTML scripting tags (href, img src, b, i, hr, font) as allowed on BB should be permitted, although I know missing a closing tag or quote may mess up things a bit - been there done that!
I too prefer HMTL over BB tags, since I'm far more familiar with it, but there isn't any simple method for stripping javascript when the full HTML in comment fields is enabled. I figured that BB would still let us format the text and add links and things though.
|
