Download & Extend

Lightbox trigger for html content works only on the first views page

Project:Lightbox2
Version:6.x-1.11
Component:Code
Category:bug report
Priority:normal
Assigned:Unassigned
Status:active

Issue Summary

I have a view listing nodes of a certain type and displaying them with views accordion. Some of the nodes have a "more>" link that is configured to work with lightbox trigger in order to display html content stored in the node's body.
But this only works on the first page. And there it is quite slow.
If you go the second page the "more>" link opens lightbox overlay but empty.

Here is the link for the view: http://www.drgf.gr/projects (search for entries with the "more>" link)
The second page: http://www.drgf.gr/projects?page=1 (see near the bottom "2002 Al Watya Development" - the more link opens an empty overlay)
Another listing where the same entry ("2002 Al Watya Development") is on the first page and the more link opens and shows the content: http://www.drgf.gr/projects/mixed-use

System and all modules updated.

Comments

#1

Plus it doesn't have to do with views accordion since the same is happening here:
http://www.drgf.gr/aaaaa
The view is formatted as html list. Still "More>" links open and display the text (albeit sluggishly) on the first page but open empty on the next pages.

#2

Title:Lightbox trigger for html content working only on the first views page» Lightbox trigger for html content works only on the first views page

Anyone any idea about what might cause this problem?

#3

#770718: Using pager means images link to the wrong items looks like it covers the same issue (though I'm not sure which one should be marked as duplicate, as they are in reference to different projects. Comment #2 has a solution which should probably be patched against lightbox2.

#4

Thanks a lot deckfifty! That solution in comment #2 solved my issue!
I tried to search issue for "trigger" but I wouldn't figure this #770718 issue had the answer.
Wow! Thanks and thanks again!

I don't know whether I should mark this as a duplicate...