[Archive-access-discuss] First Impressions Wayback 1.0

[Gina J. <gj...@lo...>]

Hi Brad,
We are not finding any problems accessing collections using Wayback 1.0.  =
David Brooks and I did a final quality review on our Supreme Court =
collection using Wayback 1.0.  No odd or unexpected behaviours. =20

I like the timeline/archival mode, and plan to ask Ignacio to configure =
the layout differently when we implement it here, most specifically to =
change the Timestamp, the layout,  and content. =20

However, there are numerous layout issues caused by the timeline in =
Wayback 1.0 which need to be fixed before we migrate our collections to =
it.  I have done screenshots of where I have seen problems.  I can put =
those up if you like or send urls.

Ignacio, am going to repeat your evaluation of what you think the problem =
may be:

<snip>
>From Ignacio
I looked a little bit at the code in the file and for what I've seen, =
the=20
problem may be in two places.

1. The page being displayed uses absolue position to display its top=20
elements, which will end up covered by the timeline box, since it is=20
position at the top by the javascript.
2. The page has some coding problems and the Parent of the timeline=20
element is not the BODY tag, but some other tag, which will not move =
the=20
box to the top of the page.

The way the script works, it grabs the actual code for the timeline box=20
and also records the PARENT of the element.
Then it removes the box (from the botton of the page) and places it at =
the=20
beginning of the PARENT element (in front of the first child)
This works if the PARENT of the box is the BODY tag.
</snip>


Gina