This is about defining what the default link option should be for imageflow items. It is also to get input on where the best place would be to put that form option.
My feeling right now is that the field format instance form and the views format form should be reserved for things that are totally specific to the view or instance. That means things like field mapping.
Themes, image styles, default link paths, onclick options, etc IMO should be in the "preset" form.
I ran into this same thing with the projekktor module. Forms can easily get polluted and overly complicated for users.
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| #9 | missing-option-definition-1541996-9.patch | 483 bytes | nagy.balint |
Comments
Comment #1
Foxhaven commented*Very* interested in this.
I am of two mind on the location, though. I do most of my configuring in Views. I like to customize the displays without changing defaults.
OTOH, I see your point both on form pollution (cool term, btw) and having it in the presets.
So, at the moment, I am leaning the same way you are: Put it in the presets. Then I can pull the appropriate preset into the different views.
:-)
Comment #2
Foxhaven commentedAfter giving this some thought, let me share how I would like to use imageflow.
The current default of a link to the image file is a good basic fall-back.
Adding in a "class" field and a (pre-) suffix field would allow that default to use "colorbox-load" or similar overlay so visitors don't get bumped to a new page and have to back up to get back to the imageflow.
The third option, link to content, is, *I* think, extremely important.
So I guess this is actually a feature request...?
Comment #3
jamesbenison commentedThe way colorbox works in this module it is using a custom script. It gets passed via the imageflow onClick function in the options array. The classes you refer to need to be added in an anchor tag, which is something imageflow (the plugin) doesn't support.
I looked briefly at the default option again a few days ago. Because the context of the image determines what "link to content" means, this isn't something I can do in a quick and dirty fix.
To be frank, I am REALLY busy right now with other stuff that absolutely must get done due to prior obligations (and I'm already behind). It might be a week or so before I can get the imageflow default link done properly. It will get done though.
Comment #4
lunk rat commented+ 1 for link to content. It would open up many possibilities for using imageflow as navigation.
Comment #5
valante commentedThere has to be a way to link to content. There's another Drupal plugin for ImageFlow, though much heavier, that manages it. Please look into it? I really like this module otherwise, it's lightweight and good.
Comment #6
jamesbenison commentedThat other module you are talking about I believe is also mine. This is the lighter weight yet more powerful replacement for it.
I'm working on this.
Comment #7
quickly commentedany progress on default link?
Comment #8
jamesbenison commentedI just pushed a commit. Basically it makes it possible to choose "link to content" or "link to image" in views. If your view has a link field in it that will also be an option.
For views choose the views format imageflow settings (not the field formatter settings).
I've pretty much decided that "nolink" should also be an option. Therefore the default is eventually going to be "no link". That last ditch link is added in the theme file. It needs to go.
This should work for most people. I'm getting a hair in anticipation of drupal 8.
Not closed yet.
Comment #9
nagy.balint commentedThanks for that! However it seems to miss the option definition. Without this it will not go into features.
Patch attached.
Comment #10
nwom commentedSince the feature itself has already been committed aside from the patch that fixes the Features module incompatibility, I will change the title and mark as Needs review.