| |
After seeing how popular the gallery section is at Brickshelf, I wondered
how other people could display their work. The solution is to allow
users to create accounts and upload it themselves!
After about a week and a half of coding, and a day or two of alpha
testing, I am pleased to announce that the BrickShelf.com Gallery is now
open to the public.
Feel free to upload (host) your MOC or other pictures of interest to
the LEGO fan community:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi
Keep in mind that this is still buggy beta code, and anything can break.
Also note that only the most essential features are in place now, and
many, many features will be added soon.
Note:
when linkinking to your folders, you can specify the path or
the cgi arguments.
for example:
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/kl/Campus/
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin?f=42
both go to the same place.
Enjoy!
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> After seeing how popular the gallery section is at Brickshelf, I wondered
> how other people could display their work. The solution is to allow
> users to create accounts and upload it themselves!
>
> After about a week and a half of coding, and a day or two of alpha
> testing, I am pleased to announce that the BrickShelf.com Gallery is now
> open to the public.
>
> Feel free to upload (host) your MOC or other pictures of interest to
> the LEGO fan community:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi
>
> Keep in mind that this is still buggy beta code, and anything can break.
> Also note that only the most essential features are in place now, and
> many, many features will be added soon.
>
> Note:
>
> when linkinking to your folders, you can specify the path or
> the cgi arguments.
>
> for example:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/kl/Campus/
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin?f=42
> both go to the same place.
Oops, that should have been
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=42
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> > After seeing how popular the gallery section is at Brickshelf, I wondered
> > how other people could display their work. The solution is to allow
> > users to create accounts and upload it themselves!
Cool.
What are your ToS?
That is...
How will you enforce against people uploading non Lego stuff?
How will you enforce against (or do you care about) people using it as a site
to host auction listing support pictures, etc?
(I haven't went and looked, maybe you have a FAQ that addresses this all...)
This is really swell! Thanks
++Lar
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> What are your ToS?
http://www.brickshelf.com/terms.html
> That is...
>
> How will you enforce against people uploading non Lego stuff?
several "moderators" with the delete function.
> How will you enforce against (or do you care about) people using it as a site
> to host auction listing support pictures, etc?
I would encourage people to use it as an auction support site, as long
as the content doesn't violate the TOS.
>
> (I haven't went and looked, maybe you have a FAQ that addresses this all...)
>
> This is really swell! Thanks
>
> ++Lar
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > How will you enforce against people uploading non Lego stuff?
>
> several "moderators" with the delete function.
What is your stance on Lego clone instruction scans?
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Tony Kilaras writes:
>
> What is your stance on Lego clone instruction scans?
That would definately be off-topic. In fact I'd prefer
that people not upload complete instruction or catalog scans
of any type to the gallery. Those should be submitted to the
scan section (note that there are different terms covering the gallery and
the scan sections).
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> In lugnet.publish, Tony Kilaras writes:
> >
> > What is your stance on Lego clone instruction scans?
>
> That would definately be off-topic. In fact I'd prefer
> that people not upload complete instruction or catalog scans
> of any type to the gallery. Those should be submitted to the
> scan section (note that there are different terms covering the gallery and
> the scan sections).
I should clarify that excerpts from (LEGO) instructions and catalogs
would be fine (example: for auction support), just not complete versions
(like in the scans section).
|
|
| |
In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
<announce>
Generally excellent ToS. Where did you crib these, or did you make them up
yourself? I need a set of ToS potentially and would like to crib... can I?
One Nit:
> (k) intentionally or
> unintentionally
note this word...
> violate any applicable local, state, national or international law,
> including, but not limited to, regulations promulgated by the U.S.
> Securities and Exchange Commission, any rules of any national or
> other securities exchange, including, without limitation, the New
> York Stock Exchange, the American Stock Exchange or the NASDAQ,
> and any regulations having the force of law;
Back to that word "unintentionally". If I don't know that I am doing something,
I certainly don't intend to do it, right? You can ask that I redress
unintentional violations, but not that I don't do them!
So this word may not be enforcable?
Just a nit.
++Lar
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> another nit:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/privacy.html
>
> which is referenced in #5, appears not to be a valid URL.
>
> ++lar
It doesn't exist yet. Actually the TOS covers privacy fairly well,
only aggregate, non-identifiable information would ever be released
to any third party.
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> <announce>
>
> Generally excellent ToS. Where did you crib these, or did you make them up
> yourself? I need a set of ToS potentially and would like to crib... can I?
Ummm.... the were heavially "borrowed" form Yahoo/Geocities,
which seemed to be the most similar type of service.
Of course I added some and deleted some made a bunch of edits.
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > In lugnet.publish, Tony Kilaras writes:
> > >
> > > What is your stance on Lego clone instruction scans?
> >
> > That would definately be off-topic. In fact I'd prefer
> > that people not upload complete instruction or catalog scans
> > of any type to the gallery. Those should be submitted to the
> > scan section (note that there are different terms covering the gallery and
> > the scan sections).
>
> I should clarify that excerpts from (LEGO) instructions and catalogs
> would be fine (example: for auction support), just not complete versions
> (like in the scans section).
Also, if there is enough interest (and the system works well) I might
set up a different website for more general use (or at least many
other specific topics).
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > > In lugnet.publish, Tony Kilaras writes:
> > > >
> > > > What is your stance on Lego clone instruction scans?
> > >
> > > That would definately be off-topic. In fact I'd prefer
> > > that people not upload complete instruction or catalog scans
> > > of any type to the gallery. Those should be submitted to the
> > > scan section (note that there are different terms covering the gallery and
> > > the scan sections).
> >
> > I should clarify that excerpts from (LEGO) instructions and catalogs
> > would be fine (example: for auction support), just not complete versions
> > (like in the scans section).
>
> Also, if there is enough interest (and the system works well) I might
> set up a different website for more general use (or at least many
> other specific topics).
I would love to have an area devoted to clone instructions. Most of the Tyco
sets are worthy of inclusion as well as some of the Ritvik sets.
|
|
| |
Hi Kevin,
I tried to register, but kept running into a problem. I input all of my
information, but ended up getting an error message stating I had used
something beyond the permissible characters [A-Z],[a-z],[0-9], etc- yet I
wasn't using anything taboo. Any thoughts?
shaun
Kevin Loch wrote:
> After seeing how popular the gallery section is at Brickshelf, I wondered
> how other people could display their work. The solution is to allow
> users to create accounts and upload it themselves!
>
> After about a week and a half of coding, and a day or two of alpha
> testing, I am pleased to announce that the BrickShelf.com Gallery is now
> open to the public.
>
> Feel free to upload (host) your MOC or other pictures of interest to
> the LEGO fan community:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi
>
> Keep in mind that this is still buggy beta code, and anything can break.
> Also note that only the most essential features are in place now, and
> many, many features will be added soon.
>
> Note:
>
> when linkinking to your folders, you can specify the path or
> the cgi arguments.
>
> for example:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/kl/Campus/
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin?f=42
> both go to the same place.
>
> Enjoy!
>
> KL
|
|
| |
>
> I tried to register, but kept running into a problem. I input all of my
> information, but ended up getting an error message stating I had used
> something beyond the permissible characters [A-Z],[a-z],[0-9], etc- yet I
> wasn't using anything taboo. Any thoughts?
>
> shaun
> > KL
Try it again now...
|
|
| |
Perfect! Thanks, Kevin.
shaun
Kevin Loch wrote:
> >
> > I tried to register, but kept running into a problem. I input all of my
> > information, but ended up getting an error message stating I had used
> > something beyond the permissible characters [A-Z],[a-z],[0-9], etc- yet I
> > wasn't using anything taboo. Any thoughts?
> >
> > shaun
> > > KL
>
> Try it again now...
|
|
| |
On Thu, 10 Feb 2000 18:53:01 GMT, "Kevin Loch" <kloch@opnsys.com>
wrote:
> > How will you enforce against (or do you care about) people using it as a site
> > to host auction listing support pictures, etc?
>
> I would encourage people to use it as an auction support site, as long
> as the content doesn't violate the TOS.
Wow, that's incredibly generous of you. I'll be making use of that
service, as long as it is ok with you.
A small suggestion. I think a link to the TOS on the member listing
page, or maybe in the little menu "area" line would be helpful. I
know I'll want to check it from time to time, and finding it only in
the new user sign-up page is a little unintuitive.
GREAT JOB!
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Mike Stanley writes:
> Wow, that's incredibly generous of you. I'll be making use of that
> service, as long as it is ok with you.
It's all relative. So far the Ebay links have been such a tiny
percentage of the overall traffic, it's lost in the noise.
Even if it becomes a large load, that's good too because it means
there is alot of good content on the site.
KL
|
|
| |
On Fri, 11 Feb 2000 17:55:37 GMT, "Kevin Loch" <kloch@opnsys.com>
wrote:
> In lugnet.publish, Mike Stanley writes:
> > Wow, that's incredibly generous of you. I'll be making use of that
> > service, as long as it is ok with you.
>
> It's all relative. So far the Ebay links have been such a tiny
> percentage of the overall traffic, it's lost in the noise.
> Even if it becomes a large load, that's good too because it means
> there is alot of good content on the site.
Ok, just so I'm clear, what sort of links are "ok" with you? The kind
that Todd doesn't allow, linking directly to the image itself and
displaying it on the auction page? Or do you want links to the page
in the gallery?
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
|
|
| |
In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> After seeing how popular the gallery section is at Brickshelf, I wondered
> how other people could display their work. The solution is to allow
> users to create accounts and upload it themselves!
I may be missing the fine print, but I don't see the instructions for where to
upload to, etc.
Russell
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Mike Stanley writes:
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2000 17:55:37 GMT, "Kevin Loch" <kloch@opnsys.com>
> wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.publish, Mike Stanley writes:
> > > Wow, that's incredibly generous of you. I'll be making use of that
> > > service, as long as it is ok with you.
> >
> > It's all relative. So far the Ebay links have been such a tiny
> > percentage of the overall traffic, it's lost in the noise.
> > Even if it becomes a large load, that's good too because it means
> > there is alot of good content on the site.
>
> Ok, just so I'm clear, what sort of links are "ok" with you? The kind
> that Todd doesn't allow, linking directly to the image itself and
> displaying it on the auction page? Or do you want links to the page
> in the gallery?
Currently the policy is that drect links to images are ok.
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Russell Clark writes:
> In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> > After seeing how popular the gallery section is at Brickshelf, I wondered
> > how other people could display their work. The solution is to allow
> > users to create accounts and upload it themselves!
>
> I may be missing the fine print, but I don't see the instructions for where to
> upload to, etc.
>
> Russell
If you are logged in (look at the top right corener) and in one of your
personal folders, you should have a link for "Upload" above the gray
title bar.
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Russell Clark writes:
> In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> > After seeing how popular the gallery section is at Brickshelf, I wondered
> > how other people could display their work. The solution is to allow
> > users to create accounts and upload it themselves!
>
> I may be missing the fine print, but I don't see the instructions for where to
> upload to, etc.
>
> Russell
If you are logged in (look at the top right corener) and in one of your
personal folders, you should see a link for "Upload" above the dark gray
title bar.
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> If you are logged in (look at the top right corener) and in one of your
> personal folders, you should have a link for "Upload" above the gray
> title bar.
Got it, thanks. I hadn't actually created a folder yet, so I hadn't seen the
choices.
Russell
|
|
| |
In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi
>
> Keep in mind that this is still buggy beta code, and anything can break.
> Also note that only the most essential features are in place now, and
> many, many features will be added soon.
In future modifications, will you be sorting the Member Index? Or how about
allowing custom minifigs from the member to be displayed? How about for each
member having a link to their personal web site? What about limiting the
number of pictures to each gallery or will that be up to the member?
Thanks
Barbara
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Barbara Sproat writes:
> In future modifications, will you be sorting the Member Index? Or how about
Yes, in many different user selectable ways.
> allowing custom minifigs from the member to be displayed? How about for each
Yes, and even better you will be able to assign any icon in your collection
to be the icon for any folder in your collection. I might allow that for
the user icon otherwise there will be a large selection of figs to choose from.
> member having a link to their personal web site? What about limiting the
> number of pictures to each gallery or will that be up to the member?
Links to personal sites is a good idea!
As for limits, As long as the content is interesting (i.e. not 30,000 copies
of the same picture) we are limited only by the system resources (which
can be expanded as required.
KL
|
|
| |
> allowing custom minifigs from the member to be displayed? How about for each
>
> Yes, and even better you will be able to assign any icon in your collection
> to be the icon for any folder in your collection. I might allow that for
> the user icon otherwise there will be a large selection of figs to choose
> from.
I like this idea. I prefer a large assortment of minifigs for each user to
select on the main page, but having our own icons for the folders would be
cool. I imagine someone like Larry having a GMLTC folder with their logo as
the link to the folder. There needs to be some way to tell if it's a
sub-folder or a picture though since both could be in the same folder.
If you (or some other artist) could come up with a bunch of standard icons, I
think that would be a nice place to start. That way we could still put up a
Town icon on our town folders even if we don't yet have a nice icon of our own.
If I'm someone that is good at building but terrible at art, I'd like to have
a good selection (5 or so of each subject) of defaults to choose from.
Back to the minifigs though, do you think it would add a significant load-up
time for the main page if we all chose different figs?
Ben Roller
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> Yes, and even better you will be able to assign any icon in your collection
> to be the icon for any folder in your collection. I might allow that for
> the user icon otherwise there will be a large selection of figs to choose
from.
Could you make a minifig generator-like device to make our own figs?
Alan
This message's random set is: 8523, www.lugnet.com/pause/search/?query=8523
|
|
| |
Todd Lehman wrote:
>
> In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > In lugnet.publish, Barbara Sproat writes:
> > > [...] Or how about allowing custom minifigs from the member to be
> > > displayed? [...]
> >
> > [...] otherwise there will be a large selection of figs to choose from.
>
> Do you think this is safe (from a legal standpoint)? LEGO has already done
> this for members at the LEGO MINDSTORMS website.
>
> We had planned to do this for LUGNET members, but then LEGO went and put
> their own minifig generator to use:
>
> http://www.legomindstorms.com/members/index.asp?Userid=151
> http://www.legomindstorms.com/members/index.asp?Userid=154
> http://www.legomindstorms.com/members/index.asp?Userid=165
> http://www.legomindstorms.com/members/index.asp?Userid=168
> etc.
>
> The reason it made us nervous when they did that is because it seems likely
> (or at least possible) that people at TLC could assume that they had thought
> up the idea first -- and that if we did it afterwards, that we must've stolen
> [sic] the idea. But the idea of an interactive minifig generator was first
> demonstrated on the net way back in 1997:
>
> http://www.baseplate.com/toys/minifig/
>
> So we've hesitated to incorporate things of that nature. (Which isn't to
> suggest that they'll never ever go in.)
>
> Maybe we're just being overly cautious.
Lemme see if I get what you're saying. You guys thought of something
first, have clearly established prior art, and when TLC comes out with
the same idea, significantly after you do, you decide to not do it any
more because they might think you stole it from them?
Yes, you're being overly cautious.
IMHO.
--
Larry Pieniazek - lpieniazek@mercator.com - http://my.voyager.net/lar
http://www.mercator.com. Mercator, the e-business transformation company
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
Note: this is a family forum!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Ben Roller writes:
> [...]
> Back to the minifigs though, do you think it would add a significant load-up
> time for the main page if we all chose different figs?
Depends on the size of the images and the number of images per page. The
neat thing is, with modern browsers and servers, a whole bunch of small
images totalling, say, 100KB can be transferred in roughly the same time
as one big 100KB image.
For example, here's a page containing 500 all-different randomly-generated
minifigs:
http://www.lugnet.com/people/members/minifig-test/
Each minifig there is 28x50 pixels and the file sizes average 909 bytes each,
for a total download size of approximately 500KB, including the index page
and HTTP protocol overhead. It's a slow-loading page, but then again there
are quite a few images.
--Todd
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Lemme see if I get what you're saying. You guys thought of something
> first, have clearly established prior art, and when TLC comes out with
> the same idea, significantly after you do, you decide to not do it any
> more because they might think you stole it from them?
No, sorry, I forgot the other related concerns... What's above is probably
only about 30-50% of it. One other thing was that it suddenly seemed a lot
less unique and special after TLC went and did it, and we had always kinda
wanted stuff on LUGNET to be special. On the other hand, no one I know ever
visits or hardly ever even mentions the official LEGO MINDSTORMS site (we all
know why), so it could still be special. Another concern is that Mini-Figure
imagery are trade dress and copyrights owned by LEGO, so it would really suck
to have it up and then be asked to take it down if they suddenly had a change
of heart. In 1997, we had met with TLC (then TLG) legal counsel to talk
about (among other things) the subtleties of displaying minifig torso art,
and although a photo of a minifig which just happens to be part of a scene is
one thing, a close-up scan or image-filling photo is quite a different thing.
The main concern they had with Suzanne's Minifig Generator at the time was
that it didn't acknowledge that LEGO owned the designs.
As far as establishing priority (in the legal sense of the word), we could
probably put a note or a link on key pages explaining that the idea was not
in fact ripped off from LEGO's site.
--Todd
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > In lugnet.publish, Barbara Sproat writes:
> > > [...] Or how about allowing custom minifigs from the member to be
> > > displayed? [...]
I see that my being unable to work has had some more consequences. I can't say
I'm unaffected by this conversation. Being discharged from hospital only
yesterday, and now leaving for ToyFair on Sunday, there won't be much I can say
here or do.
[...]
> We had planned to do this for LUGNET members, but then LEGO went and put
> their own minifig generator to use:[...]
> The reason it made us nervous when they did that is because it seems likely
> (or at least possible) that people at TLC could assume that they had thought
> up the idea first -- and that if we did it afterwards, that we must've stolen
> [sic] the idea. But the idea of an interactive minifig generator was first
> demonstrated on the net way back in 1997:
>
> http://www.baseplate.com/toys/minifig/
Actually, I think it was up and working in 1996. It didn't have its fancy
typography and disclaimer written until later.
In 1997 I wrote code for additional online capabilities -- which are not active
right now because I was fussy about how it looked.
And last year I did scans for a DUPLO fig generator and prepared more minifig
graphics.
I still intend to make the Minifig Generator a live tool for LUGNET. It's only a
matter of time.
> So we've hesitated to incorporate things of that nature. (Which isn't to
> suggest that they'll never ever go in.)
>
> Maybe we're just being overly cautious.
>
> --Todd
TLC's actions would not stop me from adding this feature to our site. Seeing
their "avitar maker" made me a bit upset (partly because they did such a poor
job). But I don't feel threatened by it.
The issues you bring up here (Todd) are ones I remember discussing, but I
believed LUGNET was still developing along its original course.
-Suz.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> After seeing how popular the gallery section is at Brickshelf, I wondered
> how other people could display their work. The solution is to allow
> users to create accounts and upload it themselves!
Thanks!
I've been having a bit of trouble uploading files, though. I had to try
multiple times for some files (I'm not done yet...), and sending a zip didn't
seem to work. Is there any chance that you'll make FTP an option?
TIA,
--Bram
|
|
| |
In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> Keep in mind that this is still buggy beta code, and anything can break.
> Also note that only the most essential features are in place now, and
> many, many features will be added soon.
Will we be able to edit folder names, descriptions, and/or filenames?
--Bram
|
|
| |
In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> many, many features will be added soon.
Are you planning on hosting DAT files[1] with the DAT MIME-type?
That way, people with LDLite or L3Lab could view the files without saving
them.
--Bram
1) http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=102
|
|
| |
Kevin, what drives the order of images in a particular folder? Right
now it seems to be alpha.
It looks like images themselves are all assigned a unique numeric key,
with a record of the folder they are in... because an image URL page
seems to be of the form:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=786
(that's Fredrik's great Lemans)
while folders have the form:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=100
suggesting that they as well have unique numeric keys and you are
keeping what images go in what folders and what their names are, etc,
elsewhere.
Given that, is it possible to:
- specify image order within a folder other than by using the name?
- supply a prev and next URL on each image page?
or is that very very hard. Both seem like they'd be nice enhancements
(the second more so than the first)
Finally, it says beta, I assume that if something goes awry you may have
to turn off access but should be able to rebuild without requiring
everyone to reupload everything, right?
Kevin Loch wrote:
>
> In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> > After seeing how popular the gallery section is at Brickshelf, I wondered
> > how other people could display their work. The solution is to allow
> > users to create accounts and upload it themselves!
--
Larry Pieniazek - lpieniazek@mercator.com - http://my.voyager.net/lar
http://www.mercator.com. Mercator, the e-business transformation company
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
Note: this is a family forum!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Todd Lehman writes:
> For example, here's a page containing 500 all-different randomly-generated
> minifigs:
>
> http://www.lugnet.com/people/members/minifig-test/
Wow! Would it be possible to generate all of those with a height
of 128 pixels (total, including space above and below fig.)?
Those would look *much* better than my lousy scans (and I could add
that feature *much* faster) :)
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Suzanne D. Rich writes:
> TLC's actions would not stop me from adding this feature to our site. Seeing
> their "avitar maker" made me a bit upset (partly because they did such a poor
> job). But I don't feel threatened by it.
>
> The issues you bring up here (Todd) are ones I remember discussing, but I
> believed LUGNET was still developing along its original course.
>
> -Suz.
I knew there would be some interesting issues around the whole minifig thing.
To be clear I *did* get the idea from Suzanne's minifig generator,
not the Mindstorms site.
However.... I never planned to have an interactive generator, rather just
a selection of (say 50-100) scans. Since todd demonstrated how easy it is
to generate a large number of quality renderings, That would generate
better results than the scans (assuming he let me use them). Otherwise
I guess I'll have to see if I can get my scanner to work again. It went
kaput after I did the second fig! The first was Timmy....
I did consider the trade dress issue as well, but since it's being used
in good taste, appropriate disclaimers should be all that is necessary.
If they had to be removed for whatever reason, it would be easy enough
to allow users to select their own icon (from their online images) as their
avatar.
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Bram Lambrecht writes:
> In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> > many, many features will be added soon.
>
> Are you planning on hosting DAT files[1] with the DAT MIME-type?
> That way, people with LDLite or L3Lab could view the files without saving
> them.
> --Bram
Absolutely! Does anyone know offhand which mime type I should use for
.DAT's?
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Bram Lambrecht writes:
> In lugnet.announce.brickshelf, Kevin Loch writes:
> > Keep in mind that this is still buggy beta code, and anything can break.
> > Also note that only the most essential features are in place now, and
> > many, many features will be added soon.
>
> Will we be able to edit folder names, descriptions, and/or filenames?
> --Bram
Yes, the very next feature will be "edit file" which will allow you to
change the description (not the filename) of a file *AND* a drop down
list of all of your folders that you can assign it to as an icon.
I've been very busy since Friday with the Greenberg Train Show (pics real
soon!) I probably won't have time to add that feature until Monday.
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > Are you planning on hosting DAT files[1] with the DAT MIME-type?
> > That way, people with LDLite or L3Lab could view the files without saving
> > them.
>
> Absolutely! Does anyone know offhand which mime type I should use for
> .DAT's?
Ya, use this:
Content-Type: application/x-ldraw
--Todd
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Kevin, what drives the order of images in a particular folder? Right
> now it seems to be alpha.
True.
>
> suggesting that they as well have unique numeric keys and you are
> keeping what images go in what folders and what their names are, etc,
> elsewhere.
True, the site runs off a database but...
The files are stored in a directory structure of
/gallery/username/folder/folder/image.jpg
which is why you can access the images directly using that path.
> Given that, is it possible to:
> - specify image order within a folder other than by using the name?
If the user wants to specify an arbitrary order, I would need to add
a sort_order field to the files table. That's a bit of work but not
impossible.
> - supply a prev and next URL on each image page?
That is easy and is very high on the priority list.
>
> Finally, it says beta, I assume that if something goes awry you may have
> to turn off access but should be able to rebuild without requiring
> everyone to reupload everything, right?
>
>
It depends on what goes awry... If the database get's hosed, I could restore
a recent backup and force a "reload" command in each folder (which syncs
the db to the files, just as when you upload new files).
(I'm not storing all the images in one folder
with names like x983347473crffeedf.jpg if that's what you mean).
KL
|
|
| |
Yipe!
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> Dang it! I type url's as bad as I drive!
Say, Kevin; where do you live so I know to avoid driving there. *smirk*
-Cheese
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/Adman4/WindBlaster/
>
> KL
>
> In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > In lugnet.publish, Todd Lehman writes:
> > > Ya, use this:
> > >
> > > Content-Type: application/x-ldraw
> >
> >
> > Thanks! It works great now:
> >
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/Adman4/WindBlaster/
> >
> > Now I just need to make a suitable LDraw icon.
> >
> > KL
|
|
| |
> In lugnet.publish, Suzanne D. Rich writes:
> > I see that my being unable to work has had some more consequences. I can't
> > say I'm unaffected by this conversation. Being discharged from hospital
> > only yesterday, and now leaving for ToyFair on Sunday, there won't be
> > much I can say here or do. [...]
> > TLC's actions would not stop me from adding this feature to our site.
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> I knew there would be some interesting issues around the whole minifig thing.
I would like to know exactly what you expected. Particularly, how I would feel
(as you are replying to my message here). I only posted to this thread because
"the whole minifig thing" is quite personal to me.
> To be clear I *did* get the idea from Suzanne's minifig generator,
> not the Mindstorms site.
To be clear, where you took the idea from was not the issue.
> However.... I never planned to have an interactive generator, rather just
> a selection of (say 50-100) scans. Since todd demonstrated how easy it is
> to generate a large number of quality renderings, That would generate
> better results than the scans (assuming he let me use them).
So, you plan to generate minifigs using the scans I did? (!)
I will not give permission to republish images taken from my site. See fine
print on the site:
"The Minifig Generator was created by Suzanne D. Rich © 1997. LEGO® is a
trademark of the LEGO Group of companies which does not sponsor, authorize or
endorse this site. Images of LEGO® brand products found here, although recorded
by Suzanne D. Rich, still remain part of the LEGO Group's trademarked visual
identity. Suzanne D. Rich can not grant permission for any such images to be
downloaded or linked to. They may NOT be republished without permission from the
LEGO Group. Please help to keep their trademarks strong. Read and heed the LEGO
Group's Fair Play document."
Not to mention the weeks of work I put into those images. They are not straight
scans. They were carefully adjusted in Adobe Photoshop to be precisely matching
in size, color and proportions.
I have to catch a train now.
-Suz.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> In lugnet.publish, Todd Lehman writes:
> > For example, here's a page containing 500 all-different randomly-generated
> > minifigs:
> >
> > http://www.lugnet.com/people/members/minifig-test/
>
> Wow! Would it be possible to generate all of those with a height
> of 128 pixels (total, including space above and below fig.)?
Technically speaking, it's possible to generate them at a variety of small
sizes -- it's basically just some pipefitting and scripting with pnmtools.
But then again it was just a little experiment page -- something from the
back burner at lugnet.com.
> Those would look *much* better than my lousy scans (and I could add
> that feature *much* faster) :)
Oops, sounds like there's been a bit of a misunderstanding(?). When I wrote
"here's a page..." above, it wasn't to say "here are a bunch of images to
take/use" but rather (literally) to say (to Ben, to address his question)
simply "here is the existance of a page" which demonstrates that download
speed isn't too bad for lots of images when they're very small. In other
words, it was a technical demonstration.
I didn't mention this before because it didn't seem relevant, but that page
was created on August 21, 1998 (at a different URL back then) and was simply
something lying around on the back burner that happened to be relevant to the
discussion (Ben's question in particular). Although it probably didn't take
more than a couple hours to make back then, it wasn't something assembled
yesterday on-the-fly for any particular purpose or suggestion.
--Todd
|
|
| |
"Bram Lambrecht" <BramL@JUNO.com> writes:
> I love your Le-Mans car too:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/fredrigl/le-mans/
> Is it on your site?
Thanks! Yes, it is on my site, buried down deeply:
http://www.math.uio.no/~fredrigl/technic/v8-racer/
I'm currently thinking about reorganizing my site, but I'm not sure
where to begin. Oh, and I am actually going to build something which
isn't a wheeled vehicle soon. I only have about three or four car
projects that need to be finished off first...
Fredrik
|
|
| |
Heavily snipped
Suzanne D. Rich wrote:
> Kevin Loch said:
> > In lugnet.publish, Suzanne D. Rich writes:
> > However.... I never planned to have an interactive generator, rather just
> > a selection of (say 50-100) scans. Since todd demonstrated how easy it is
> > to generate a large number of quality renderings, That would generate
> > better results than the scans
> > (assuming he let me use them).
broke out for emphasis
> So, you plan to generate minifigs using the scans I did? (!)
I suspect Kev might, IF you gave permission. I doubt he'd do it without
your permission. He doesn't operate that way.
> I will not give permission to republish images taken from my site. See fine
> print on the site:
>
> "The Minifig Generator was created by Suzanne D. Rich © 1997. LEGO® is a
> trademark of the LEGO Group of companies which does not sponsor, authorize or
> endorse this site. Images of LEGO® brand products found here, although recorded
> by Suzanne D. Rich, still remain part of the LEGO Group's trademarked visual
> identity.
> Suzanne D. Rich can not grant permission
broke out for emphasis
> for any such images to be
> downloaded or linked to. They may NOT be republished without permission
> from the LEGO Group.
broke out for emphasis
> Please help to keep their trademarks strong. Read and heed the LEGO
> Group's Fair Play document."
I'm not sure I agree with 100% of this fine print. Where I think it
breaks down is that the permission to republish images (for
noncommercial, fannish use) typically rests with the image originator.
Specifically, Fair Play says that scans of Lego trade dress items (in
images that TLC produced such as instructions or catalogs) may indeed be
used by fans, although it does not specifically address photographs or
scans of physical items themselves. By inference, though, it is OK to
create such images. Else all of us who have personal creation websites
(whether the items on them are photoed or generated with LDraw or POVray
or whatever) are in a lot of trouble. Surely that's not what is
intended, so as is usual in IP law, we reason from intent and from
similarity. MOCs are similar to scans in that they involve TLC trade
dress elements, but they are different in that they aren't works of TLC,
they are works of others. Therefore they are more weakly protected.
Now, given that we have the right to create and display MOC images, who
has the right to decide whether they can be reproduced? They're TLC
trade dress, but to say that no one can link to images or web pages in
the general case is unenforcable. They're your copyrighted material. To
say that ANYONE cal link to them (if they're works that are not
copyrighted by TLC per se, that is, they are your original works and
therefore you hold the ocpyright) and you have no control or
responsibility, is also incorrect.
That is, YOU control who can or can't link or copy these images. You can
set things up technically so that no one can link. You can't technically
stop image capture, although you can legally stop it, (by lawsuit for
copyright infringment) you hold the copyright.
In fact, I would argue that you have some obligation to ensure that
images that you create are NOT used in ways that TLC doesn't sanction,
to the extent of assisting TLC in asserting rights to their trade dress,
but that's a different issue.
OK, so are the results of the minifig generator a MOC? I would argue
that they are. Putting minifigs together in random ways is essentially a
MOC. Now, it's a slightly different MOC than if you actually put them
together physically, but physicality is not required. No one would argue
that Bram's pentawhatzits isn't a MOC, whether he actually realised it
in physicality or not.
SO, this statement " Suzanne D. Rich can not grant permission for any
such images to be
downloaded or linked to." is, IMHO, incorrect. UNLESS you have reached
some special legal arrangement with TLC about these images different
than most of the rest of us have. (most of us have no special
arrangement with TLC, we are merely bound by Fair Play) That may well be
the case, but if so you probably ought to explicitly say so in the fine
print because as it stands, I feel it's misleading to those that might
want to model after it, it draws invalid inferences.
Now, all that said, you may well not want to give Kev the right to use
these things. You, after all, put a lot of work into them, and
brickshelf, after all, may be viewed as a (friendly) competitor to
Lugnet. It has implemented some (relatively minor) things of the Lugnet
Manifesto faster than Lugnet itself has. (Huw's site can also be viewed
as competition in that it also implemented some things in the manifesto)
Competition is good. It drives feature set improvement. The Pause DB
search and org features are better now than they were before Huw did his
reorg with new ways to get at the info.
But that doesn't mean you have to HELP your competition and so you are
under no obligation to allow Kevin to use these images to make his site
more fun. Kevin may well have to do the hard work of scanning, resizing,
cleaning up, etc... himself. If he did so, the resulting images (derived
from the the resulting MOC behind them) would be his, not TLC's
copyrighted work.
But the conclusion that someone else HAS to reproduce your work in order
to get the effect because you CAN'T grant the rights may not be a valid
one. It's YOUR choice. That's my opinion anyway.
> Not to mention the weeks of work I put into those images. They are not straight
> scans. They were carefully adjusted in Adobe Photoshop to be precisely matching
> in size, color and proportions.
And that's why you may well not want to grant permission. I have stuff I
did that took a lot of work that I assert copyright on and have no
intention of granting blanket permission to. But it's my decision, not
TLC's. I care a lot about this discussion for that very reason. If my
MOCs are not mine to decide what to do with, and my MOC images are not
mine to do what I want with, subject only to Fair Play (not defaming or
infringing on TLC branding or copyrights or trade dress, or leaving
false impressions with consumers), it takes a lot of fun out of the
game.
> I have to catch a train now.
Lucky you! best way to travel.
--
Larry Pieniazek - lpieniazek@mercator.com - http://my.voyager.net/lar
http://www.mercator.com. Mercator, the e-business transformation company
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
Note: this is a family forum!
|
|
| |
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> writes:
> No one would argue that Bram's pentawhatzits isn't a MOC, whether
> he actually realised it in physicality or not.
I'm getting mentioned quite a lot today :) For anyone interested, the
name is bastardized Latin (using a dictionary, I don't speak Latin)
Five- wing- nifty suffix
Penta- pteri- goid
I _have_ built the model and its cradle, which actually holds it quite
well. There is a bit of warpage in the horizontal axle-thingy, but I
have a ton of those from MindFest, so I don't mind.
However, there *are* a few models that I've never built...can you guess
which ones?[1] :)
--Bram
1) Shameless plug to build traffic. (See sig for URL)
Bram Lambrecht / o o \ BramL@juno.com
-------------------oooo-----(_)-----oooo-------------------
WWW: http://www.chuh.org/Students/Bram-Lambrecht/
-----------------------------------------------------------
|
|
| |
On Sun, 13 Feb 2000 11:09:44 GMT, "Suzanne D. Rich"
<suz@baseplate.com> wrote:
> > However.... I never planned to have an interactive generator, rather just
> > a selection of (say 50-100) scans. Since todd demonstrated how easy it is
> > to generate a large number of quality renderings, That would generate
> > better results than the scans (assuming he let me use them).
>
> So, you plan to generate minifigs using the scans I did? (!)
I read that as "if Todd (assuming Todd has your permission to do so)
let me use them" I would use them. Or, more broadly, "since this is
something people are already asking for, and since I've already put a
ton of work into putting together the other parts of this Gallery
which is probably the coolest thing people have seen in a long time,
sure, I'd make use of those images and save myself a little time, and
at the same time provide people with high-quality images - IF it's ok
with the person (people) who made the images."
> I will not give permission to republish images taken from my site. See fine
> print on the site:
>
> "The Minifig Generator was created by Suzanne D. Rich © 1997. LEGO® is a
> trademark of the LEGO Group of companies which does not sponsor, authorize or
> endorse this site. Images of LEGO® brand products found here, although recorded
> by Suzanne D. Rich, still remain part of the LEGO Group's trademarked visual
> identity. Suzanne D. Rich can not grant permission for any such images to be
> downloaded or linked to. They may NOT be republished without permission from the
> LEGO Group. Please help to keep their trademarks strong. Read and heed the LEGO
> Group's Fair Play document."
I read what Larry wrote. I'm not a lawyer, though, so I don't really
have much of an opinion. What he says seems well-thought-out, but who
knows.
> Not to mention the weeks of work I put into those images. They are not straight
> scans. They were carefully adjusted in Adobe Photoshop to be precisely matching
> in size, color and proportions.
And I'm sure we all can appreciate the work you've put into it, just
like we can appreciate all the work lots of people have put into
sites, programs, etc that we've all come to know and love.
**If** the Lego Group issues aren't really an issue, this seems to
mainly boil down to a sharing/respect issue. We've seen Kevin (and
Todd and others) be respectful and sharing before, especially in the
interest of doing cool things for the community. Not sure why this
would be very different, but then again, it's not my stuff or my work
that went into it, so I wouldn't presume to tell you what to do with
it.
I'll like the Gallery whether it continues to have one minifig image
for everyone or many images from which to choose, including those we
might provide for ourselves. The functionality is what really
matters, although the decoration would make it more
interesting/pleasing to look at and work with.
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
|
|
| |
On Sun, 13 Feb 2000 12:01:59 GMT, "Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com>
wrote:
> I didn't mention this before because it didn't seem relevant, but that page
> was created on August 21, 1998 (at a different URL back then) and was simply
> something lying around on the back burner that happened to be relevant to the
> discussion (Ben's question in particular). Although it probably didn't take
> more than a couple hours to make back then, it wasn't something assembled
> yesterday on-the-fly for any particular purpose or suggestion.
On a much lighter note, I really liked how the page loaded. I am
guessing that the order in which the images appeared on the page was
not caused by anything other than load times, but it was cool to watch
gaps appear in the lines of minifigs then watch them be filled in
later...
And yeah, it doesn't take much to amuse me.
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
|
|
| |
Some more enhancement requests.
1. stats. Can you tell me how many folders and how many images are on
file for each person while I am looking at the list of all the people?
This way I can tell whether it's worth snooping into someone's folders
to see if something is in there. I've snooped into 1/2 dozen folders and
came up dry, which is slow and boring.
2. hotlist. Can you tell me which images are being viewed the most?
3. recently created list. Can you tell me what's new? For a browser this
would save a LOT of time...
Stuff to think about. Thanks bunches, as always.
--
Larry Pieniazek - lpieniazek@mercator.com - http://my.voyager.net/lar
http://www.mercator.com. Mercator, the e-business transformation company
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
Note: this is a family forum!
|
|
| |
Bram said:
> I _have_ built the model and its cradle, which actually holds it quite
> well. There is a bit of warpage in the horizontal axle-thingy, but I
> have a ton of those from MindFest, so I don't mind.
> However, there *are* a few models that I've never built...can you guess
> which ones?[1] :)
The Zero.
Alan
This message's random set is: 6505,
http://www.lugnet.com/pause/search/?query=6505
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Suzanne D. Rich writes:
>
> I would like to know exactly what you expected. Particularly, how I would feel
> (as you are replying to my message here). I only posted to this thread because
> "the whole minifig thing" is quite personal to me.
Since I had no intentions of using a "minifig generator", I diddn't think
you would be affected at all. I did expect some discussion about the IP issues
with TLC.
>
> To be clear, where you took the idea from was not the issue.
ok.
>
> So, you plan to generate minifigs using the scans I did? (!)
> I will not give permission to republish images taken from my site. See fine
> print on the site:
Absolutely not! I never said that! In fact what I said is that I planned
to use my scans. I think you are confusing my plan of allowing users to select
from specific minifigs and your minifig generator (clearly two different
functions). And when I asked Todd to generate the 500 figs for me I had
assumed that they were renderings, generated on the fly, not your scans (that's
the way they looked to me). The fact that (I thought) they were rendered
was why I figured they would be better quality than scans. Please read what
I say carefully before you accuse me of trying to steal something.
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > So, you plan to generate minifigs using the scans I did? (!)
> > I will not give permission to republish images taken from my site. See fine
> > print on the site:
>
> Absolutely not! I never said that! In fact what I said is that I planned
> to use my scans. I think you are confusing my plan of allowing users to
> select from specific minifigs and your minifig generator (clearly two
> different functions). And when I asked Todd to generate the 500 figs for
> me I had assumed that they were renderings, generated on the fly, not your
> scans (that's the way they looked to me). The fact that (I thought) they
> were rendered was why I figured they would be better quality than scans.
> Please read what I say carefully before you accuse me of trying to steal
> something.
I think she misunderstood what you meant. She'd been up most of the night
packing for a 6:45 a.m. train and had logged in quick just to check mail,
etc. and probably wasn't expecting to encounter anything out of the ordinary.
Probably read the message with a bit of haste and/or panic...
Apologies.
--Todd
|
|
| |
"Alan Gerber" <foofoogood@hotmail.com> writes:
> Bram said:
> > However, there *are* a few models that I've never built...can you
> > guess which ones?[1] :)
>
> The Zero.
Well, I admit that on the page of that model. There are others :)
--Bram
Bram Lambrecht / o o \ BramL@juno.com
-------------------oooo-----(_)-----oooo-------------------
WWW: http://www.chuh.org/Students/Bram-Lambrecht/
-----------------------------------------------------------
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Some more enhancement requests.
>
> 1. stats. Can you tell me how many folders and how many images are on
> file for each person while I am looking at the list of all the people?
> This way I can tell whether it's worth snooping into someone's folders
> to see if something is in there. I've snooped into 1/2 dozen folders and
> came up dry, which is slow and boring.
>
> 2. hotlist. Can you tell me which images are being viewed the most?
>
> 3. recently created list. Can you tell me what's new? For a browser this
> would save a LOT of time...
>
> Stuff to think about. Thanks bunches, as always.
The recently updated folders display will come right after the edit image
option (i.e. real soon).
The hotlist is a good idea. Statistics in general are interesting, but will
probably be pulled from the logs, to avoid database writes on each page view.
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Heavily snipped
ditto.
> brickshelf, after all, may be viewed as a (friendly) competitor to
I don't see it that way, although I can understand why some would.
I am not a big fan of duplicating other peoples efforts.
That's why I never made a set database, because a great one already
existed.
I was unaware that image hosting was in the Lugnet long-term plan.
It does seem to be a logical extension of the Brickshelf site,
which is essentially an image warehouse. The gallery function grew out
of the need for people to host their personal images. This was also
a great project for me to further develop my C skills with.
I guess you could consider the "Member Index" as a community which might
compete with the Lugnet community. I expect the member index to become
irrelevant as soon as the "recent stuff" page is working. I really had no
choice. If people are going to upload images, they need verified accounts,
and you need some logical way to access/present that information. The
member index is just a side-effect of the image warehouse, not the focus.
The focus is and always will be on the content.
KL
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> I was unaware that image hosting was in the Lugnet long-term plan.
I'd say if anything it's in the really really long-term plan -- someday when
bandwidth grows on trees. Image hosting was the very first thing Suzanne and
I talked about doing back in the summer of '96 but as soon as it became clear
that places like Geocities could do that sort of thing already, there didn't
seem to be much point in ever worrying about that.
What you've created is incredible, BTW, and far cooler than Geocities could
ever be for images and stuff!
--Todd
|
|
| |
Matthew Wilkins wrote:
>
> Yipe!
>
> In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > Dang it! I type url's as bad as I drive!
>
> Say, Kevin; where do you live so I know to avoid driving there. *smirk*
I live about a mile away from Kevin, just stay off the sidewalks and
you should be fine. ;)
-chris
|
|
| |
Tony Kilaras wrote:
>
> In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > > In lugnet.publish, Kevin Loch writes:
> > > > In lugnet.publish, Tony Kilaras writes:
> > > > >
> > > > > What is your stance on Lego clone instruction scans?
> > > >
> > > > That would definately be off-topic. In fact I'd prefer
> > > > that people not upload complete instruction or catalog scans
> > > > of any type to the gallery. Those should be submitted to the
> > > > scan section (note that there are different terms covering the gallery and
> > > > the scan sections).
> > >
> > > I should clarify that excerpts from (LEGO) instructions and catalogs
> > > would be fine (example: for auction support), just not complete versions
> > > (like in the scans section).
> >
> > Also, if there is enough interest (and the system works well) I might
> > set up a different website for more general use (or at least many
> > other specific topics).
>
> I would love to have an area devoted to clone instructions. Most of the Tyco
> sets are worthy of inclusion as well as some of the Ritvik sets.
Note that before anyone goes publishing clone scans, we need to
determine the various clone's IP policies. TLC has given guidance in
this area which seems to allow the scans. This policy can NOT be assumed
to be a default for other companies.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
Kevin Loch wrote:
> > when linkinking to your folders, you can specify the path or
> > the cgi arguments.
> >
> > for example:
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/kl/Campus/
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin?f=42
> > both go to the same place.
>
> Oops, that should have been
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=42
The path version doesn't seem to work anymore. I've been slowly
categorizing web pages, and would like to be able to point to reasonably
specific pages, which won't be too changeable, so the number reference
doesn't seem ideal since it can change.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 16:26:14 GMT Frank Filz <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote
concerning 'Re: Announcing Brickshelf.com Gallery for everyone!':
> Kevin Loch wrote:
> > > http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/kl/Campus/
>
> The path version doesn't seem to work anymore. I've been slowly
> categorizing web pages, and would like to be able to point to reasonably
> specific pages, which won't be too changeable, so the number reference
> doesn't seem ideal since it can change.
doesn't work?
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/zigdon/wamalug
Dan
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Frank Filz writes:
> Kevin Loch wrote:
> > > when linkinking to your folders, you can specify the path or
> > > the cgi arguments.
> > >
> > > for example:
> > > http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/kl/Campus/
The path version does still work. I haven't changed that.
KL
|
|
| |
Kevin Loch wrote:
>
> In lugnet.publish, Dan Boger writes:
> > On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 16:26:14 GMT Frank Filz <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote
> > concerning 'Re: Announcing Brickshelf.com Gallery for everyone!':
> > > Kevin Loch wrote:
> > > > > http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/kl/Campus/
> > >
> > > The path version doesn't seem to work anymore. I've been slowly
> > > categorizing web pages, and would like to be able to point to reasonably
> > > specific pages, which won't be too changeable, so the number reference
> > > doesn't seem ideal since it can change.
> >
> > doesn't work?
> >
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/zigdon/wamalug
>
> Of course not. You made a typo:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/zigdon/Wamalug
Ah, I think I see why it doesn't work, it doesn't work if Javascript
isn't enabled. Can you fix that? All you're doing in the Javascript is a
re-direct.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Frank Filz writes:
> Kevin Loch wrote:
> Ah, I think I see why it doesn't work, it doesn't work if Javascript
> isn't enabled. Can you fix that? All you're doing in the Javascript is a
> re-direct.
Yes, the site uses javascript redirects in several places.
I'm not sure I can do it with mod-rewrite but I'll look into it.
KL
|
|
| |
Kevin Loch wrote:
>
> In lugnet.publish, Frank Filz writes:
> > Kevin Loch wrote:
> > Ah, I think I see why it doesn't work, it doesn't work if Javascript
> > isn't enabled. Can you fix that? All you're doing in the Javascript is a
> > re-direct.
>
> Yes, the site uses javascript redirects in several places.
>
> I'm not sure I can do it with mod-rewrite but I'll look into it.
I'm not sure what mod-rewrite is, but couldn't you use something like:
<META HTTP-EQUIV="refresh" CONTENT="3; url=Lego.html">
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
|
