Op 7 okt 2010, om 21:34 heeft Andrew Gray het volgende geschreven:
On 7 October 2010 14:23, Krinkle
<krinklemail(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Main reason being that, although the buttons are
highly useful (and I
can't imagine any big usercase in which they would be unwanted),
so aside from that.... they are also in a very visible area that lots
of scripts, tools and applications do or could potentially use to
print their buttons and all sorts of triggers aswell.
In order to not further complicate that area (eg. "Oh I can't program
it here because some of the users of this particular script puts the
buttons there also..");
Now you mention it, I'm really surprised I haven't seen anything else
using that big white-space area. But it seems a bit odd to keep it
empty just in case someone else wants to use it, especially when
making these prominent is so useful.
A useful solution might be to implement an option to have the "normal"
sharing buttons display below the images, and then anyone writing a
script which wants to use the right-hand side can include the trigger
for that function - move them out of the way in order to add in your
new exciting rotation tool or what have you, but not affect them the
rest of the time. As long as that second tool is itself an opt-in
option, this wouldn't conflict too much...
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk
Just in case we misunderstood eachother, I didn't mean that it's a
problem that
the icons are as big as they are now at the position they are now
(large and in a vertical row next to the image)
However, I'm just saying that it's good to keep it that way (atleast
not providing an option like:
StockPhoto.position.options = ["top left", "bottom right",
"upside
down here", "funky cool there", "small icons in the corner",
"big
icons in the footer"];
I totally agree that it is odd to keep the space empty just becuase
someone could use it.
We are the ones using it now, so that's fine. But just keep it
consistant way :-)
--
Krinkle