From: barry <sla...@i1...> - 2001-07-19 01:42:15
|
Ugh... my bad - sorry for the resend, but the first one had a totally incorrect subject line so some of you might have missed it.... Barry ------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for the help last week on the per-section templates. Now, as I work my way through the site design/templates/functionality onion, I wonder if anyone has advice on this stumbling block? 1 - Where in the templates are the right side blocks inserted? I see what looks like a default set in display;misc;default, but I don't see how that reacts to the user setting their own selection of blocks 2 - Is there a way to associate different blocks with different templates? Maybe the answer to the previous question will make the answer to this one obvious. I don't want all my blocks to have the same format, so even if I modify the fancybox template, I will still have only one. will the scheme work for new blocks I create? 3 - has anyone tried using blocks as containers for ads? Thoughts or suggestions on that experience to share? Thanks in advance, Barry |
From: Nathan V. <na...@th...> - 2001-07-19 19:54:42
|
First of all, we rewrote the getting_started document last week, and it's available on sourceforge (in POD format...but uh, needs updating already), and also at http://projects.thethirdsector.com/slashguide.html It covers the blocks/templates distinction a bit. Comments on that document are welcome... On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, barry wrote: > 1 - Where in the templates are the right side blocks inserted? I see what > looks like a default set in display;misc;default, but I don't see how that > reacts to the user setting their own selection of blocks To change which blocks are displayed by default, set the ordernum of the blocks you want visible above 0, and they will be displayed in the order of their ordernums. > 2 - Is there a way to associate different blocks with different templates? > Maybe the answer to the previous question will make the answer to this one > obvious. I don't want all my blocks to have the same format, so even if I > modify the fancybox template, I will still have only one. will the scheme > work for new blocks I create? In my message last week I explained how you can have blocks associated with sections: > For *blocks*, the old method still applies in slash 2-- so if you want an > "older stuff" block in your debian section, you have to make a block named > debian_more (that's why by default there are blocks like features_more and > articles_more). Also, if you have a block named "debian" it will show up > on all the pages in the debian section (index and articles). So you can have section-specific templates and section-specific blocks, but it's dones a different way. > 3 - has anyone tried using blocks as containers for ads? Thoughts or > suggestions on that experience to share? nope, not me... Cheers, nathan -- Nathan Vonnahme na...@th... senior web developer third sector technologies http://enteuxis.org/nathan http://thethirdsector.com |
From: Brian A. <br...@ta...> - 2001-07-19 20:15:08
|
Nathan Vonnahme wrote: > First of all, we rewrote the getting_started document last week, and it's > available on sourceforge (in POD format...but uh, needs updating already), > and also at > http://projects.thethirdsector.com/slashguide.html > It covers the blocks/templates distinction a bit. Comments on that > document are welcome... I am getting a 404 on the document. What license is the document under? AKA at some point I want to add some more docs to slashcode and if it is well written, then it would make for a nice addition. -Brian |
From: Nathan V. <na...@th...> - 2001-07-20 01:44:30
|
Duh, that should be .shtml. http://projects.thethirdsector.com/slashguide.shtml Dan and I intended to contribute it to the slash project, which is why he put it in the patches section on sourceforge. Or maybe it'll go in Alex's FAQ or whatever. It's not that well-written but it's a lot better than the wrong, outdated stuff in the getting_started.shtml that ships with slash 2.0. And also now it's in POD to match the rest of the docs. So, the license is "here have this we needed it anyway and we're also trying to show off because our company really needs some more slash consulting work right now." -n On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Brian Aker wrote: > Nathan Vonnahme wrote: > > First of all, we rewrote the getting_started document last week, and it's > > available on sourceforge (in POD format...but uh, needs updating already), > > and also at > > http://projects.thethirdsector.com/slashguide.html > > It covers the blocks/templates distinction a bit. Comments on that > > document are welcome... > I am getting a 404 on the document. What license is the document > under? AKA at some point I want to add some more docs to slashcode > and if it is well written, then it would make for a nice addition. > -Brian > > _______________________________________________ > Slashcode-general mailing list > Sla...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/slashcode-general > |