Alright, I'm hella busy this week, so I won't have time to finish my work on the media manager mockup. But I've attached two shots for your consideration. One is with the media manager closed (default of course). Click the media manager tab and the page is split open, revealing the media manager underneath.
A quick quick quick walkthrough of what I like to call a 'feature-rich environment':
1) You can filter, sort and search your media library. 2) Uploading takes place in the same area, I'm working on that stuff now. 3) It is 100% of the browser width to give you more space. 4) Like the textarea, you can resize the preview shelf, but grabbing the handle underneath the scrollbar. 5) Double clicking a media preview, rolls out a small editing pane next to the image where you can edit title, desc. & tags. 6) You add media to the content area by dragging and dropping. 7) There will be more stuff :)
Michael Heilemann wrote: > Alright, I'm hella busy this week, so I won't have time to finish my > work on the media manager mockup. But I've attached two shots for your > consideration. One is with the media manager closed (default of > course). Click the media manager tab and the page is split open, > revealing the media manager underneath.
> A quick quick quick walkthrough of what I like to call a 'feature-rich > environment':
> 1) You can filter, sort and search your media library. > 2) Uploading takes place in the same area, I'm working on that stuff now. > 3) It is 100% of the browser width to give you more space. > 4) Like the textarea, you can resize the preview shelf, but grabbing > the handle underneath the scrollbar. > 5) Double clicking a media preview, rolls out a small editing pane > next to the image where you can edit title, desc. & tags. > 6) You add media to the content area by dragging and dropping. > 7) There will be more stuff :)
> I can hear the cries of the Habari coders from here ;)
> p.s: Awesome :P
> Michael Heilemann wrote: > > Alright, I'm hella busy this week, so I won't have time to finish my > > work on the media manager mockup. But I've attached two shots for your > > consideration. One is with the media manager closed (default of > > course). Click the media manager tab and the page is split open, > > revealing the media manager underneath.
> > A quick quick quick walkthrough of what I like to call a 'feature-rich > > environment':
> > 1) You can filter, sort and search your media library. > > 2) Uploading takes place in the same area, I'm working on that stuff now. > > 3) It is 100% of the browser width to give you more space. > > 4) Like the textarea, you can resize the preview shelf, but grabbing > > the handle underneath the scrollbar. > > 5) Double clicking a media preview, rolls out a small editing pane > > next to the image where you can edit title, desc. & tags. > > 6) You add media to the content area by dragging and dropping. > > 7) There will be more stuff :)
> Michael Heilemann wrote: > > Alright, I'm hella busy this week, so I won't have time to finish my > > work on the media manager mockup. But I've attached two shots for your > > consideration. One is with the media manager closed (default of > > course). Click the media manager tab and the page is split open, > > revealing the media manager underneath.
> > A quick quick quick walkthrough of what I like to call a 'feature-rich > > environment':
> > 1) You can filter, sort and search your media library. > > 2) Uploading takes place in the same area, I'm working on that stuff > now. > > 3) It is 100% of the browser width to give you more space. > > 4) Like the textarea, you can resize the preview shelf, but grabbing > > the handle underneath the scrollbar. > > 5) Double clicking a media preview, rolls out a small editing pane > > next to the image where you can edit title, desc. & tags. > > 6) You add media to the content area by dragging and dropping. > > 7) There will be more stuff :)
> I can hear the cries of the Habari coders from here ;)
> p.s: Awesome :P
> Michael Heilemann wrote: > > Alright, I'm hella busy this week, so I won't have time to finish my > > work on the media manager mockup. But I've attached two shots for your > > consideration. One is with the media manager closed (default of > > course). Click the media manager tab and the page is split open, > > revealing the media manager underneath.
> > A quick quick quick walkthrough of what I like to call a 'feature-rich > > environment':
> > 1) You can filter, sort and search your media library. > > 2) Uploading takes place in the same area, I'm working on that stuff now. > > 3) It is 100% of the browser width to give you more space. > > 4) Like the textarea, you can resize the preview shelf, but grabbing > > the handle underneath the scrollbar. > > 5) Double clicking a media preview, rolls out a small editing pane > > next to the image where you can edit title, desc. & tags. > > 6) You add media to the content area by dragging and dropping. > > 7) There will be more stuff :)
Mike I must say great work.. I really love the way creativity is pouring into habari everyday. In the final release i would love to see a media manager similar to the mockup...
Very nice Mr. Heilemann, very nice indeed :) (though I'm worried Apple might sue over the similarities to iTunes buttons!)
With this in mind, how do the Powers That Be envisage these thumbnails will be created? If they're going to be created with GD2/imagemagick, perhaps we could throw in the ability to crop images that have already been uploaded?
Heck, if we're already sacrificing developers, may as well get the best corpse-to-features ratio!
On 1/23/07, Andrew Krespanis <leftjustif...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Very nice Mr. Heilemann, very nice indeed :) > (though I'm worried Apple might sue over the similarities to iTunes > buttons!)
Yeah, I blatantly emulated those :)
With this in mind, how do the Powers That Be envisage these thumbnails
> will be created? If they're going to be created with GD2/imagemagick, > perhaps we could throw in the ability to crop images that have already > been uploaded?
I'd love the ability to crop, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
Heck, if we're already sacrificing developers, may as well get the best
On 1/23/07, Michael Heilemann <heilem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > With this in mind, how do the Powers That Be envisage these thumbnails > > will be created? If they're going to be created with GD2/imagemagick, > > perhaps we could throw in the ability to crop images that have already > > been uploaded?
> I'd love the ability to crop, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
Of all of the suggested features, I think cropping is one of the easiest. In comparison to getting the bar itself working, cropping may be a walk in the park.
Not having seen your idea of what happens when you select a file, I will try to persuade you toward a lightbox/thickbox implementation, since that would present the greatest range for selecting a crop area and also allow us to add a few text fields for alt text and whatnot.
Of course, that (as if the design itself didn't) brings forward the issue of a javascript requirement in the admin. Will this work at all without javascript? Or are we now mandating javascript as an admin requirement?
I'm also curious how this design handles video and, particularly, audio.
Also, I've never been a fan of the "one big stream of media" idea - where *all* of the images show up ordered in some way defined by the system. I prefer to organize my media by uploading batches to my server into their own directories. So I might, for example, have a directory "2007/birthday" with all of my birthday photos from this year. Being that media on my own server would not likelye have tags upon ftp upload, how would I navigate this?
> > Heck, if we're already sacrificing developers, may as well get the best > > corpse-to-features ratio!
On 1/23/07, Owen Winkler <epit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Of course, that (as if the design itself didn't) brings forward the > issue of a javascript requirement in the admin. Will this work at all > without javascript? Or are we now mandating javascript as an admin > requirement?
I seem to recall (but I'm too lazy to search the archives) that it was proposed a week or two ago that requiring a modern browser supporting JS to use the admin was not too much to ask.
-- Justin Moore aka wantmoore --------------------------------------- www.wantmoore.com
> Of all of the suggested features, I think cropping is one of the > easiest. In comparison to getting the bar itself working, cropping > may be a walk in the park.
/me is flaunting a big broad 'I'm not guilty' smile on his face.
Not having seen your idea of what happens when you select a file, I
> will try to persuade you toward a lightbox/thickbox implementation, > since that would present the greatest range for selecting a crop area > and also allow us to add a few text fields for alt text and whatnot.
I'll be sure to mockup it all up as I see it working, but as usual everything is up for grabs.
Of course, that (as if the design itself didn't) brings forward the
> issue of a javascript requirement in the admin. Will this work at all > without javascript? Or are we now mandating javascript as an admin > requirement?
I think it should work sans JS by removing the media library. The kind of media library functionality that can be done without JS is really pointless IMHO. And also I don't think it is too much to ask that people have JS enabled if they are doing 'advanced' blogging.
But that is again, my attitude.
That said, no, this couldn't be done in any way shape or form without JS, Flash or Java. Since the two latter are horrible choices, JS it is.
I'm also curious how this design handles video and, particularly, audio.
Audio would be an icon entry with a play button that lets you preview it. It can be done in a couple of ways I suppose. Video... Well that's another matter.
Also, I've never been a fan of the "one big stream of media" idea -
> where *all* of the images show up ordered in some way defined by the > system. I prefer to organize my media by uploading batches to my > server into their own directories. So I might, for example, have a > directory "2007/birthday" with all of my birthday photos from this > year. Being that media on my own server would not likelye have tags > upon ftp upload, how would I navigate this?
Well, first of all, I didn't intend to entirely replace proper gallery solutions or flickr. So perhaps it shouldn't be able to 'group' items. But if it should, that could be built as well, though perhaps it should have a flickr organizr page for doing more advanced stuff like that.
On 1/23/07, Michael Heilemann <heilem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it should work sans JS by removing the media library. The kind of > media library functionality that can be done without JS is really pointless > IMHO. And also I don't think it is too much to ask that people have JS > enabled if they are doing 'advanced' blogging.
I don't think this is unreasonable, but we should decide what we're going to support to what level so that it can be documented.
> Well, first of all, I didn't intend to entirely replace proper gallery > solutions or flickr. So perhaps it shouldn't be able to 'group' items. But > if it should, that could be built as well, though perhaps it should have a > flickr organizr page for doing more advanced stuff like that.
That brings up my hope for not *replacing* Gallery, but for *integrating* nicely with a local Gallery installation. Since Gallery provides heirarchical organization of photos, and so does your server's file system, perhaps we should allow that kind of navigation within that system, too.
I still would like to keep it simple. I think that the stream of media works fine as a default and inside directories, but I would also like a way to navigate among the directories. Think of it like categories versus tags. Everything gets categorized into directories and tags are optional. We have a way to get at the tags, but now we need a way to navigate the categories.
Well, for folders I guess you could just do folder 'items', that when you double-click them takes you down into the folder, replacing the current items with the folders items... Shouldn't be too hard.
That said, I personally prefer the purity and simplicity of a single layer.
The problem is providing another layer of control for putting items into folders and what not.
I'll soak my brain in it later on. There might be a suave solution to it hiding in the back of my brain :P
On 1/23/07, Owen Winkler <epit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/23/07, Michael Heilemann <heilem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think it should work sans JS by removing the media library. The kind > of > > media library functionality that can be done without JS is really > pointless > > IMHO. And also I don't think it is too much to ask that people have JS > > enabled if they are doing 'advanced' blogging.
> I don't think this is unreasonable, but we should decide what we're > going to support to what level so that it can be documented.
> > Well, first of all, I didn't intend to entirely replace proper gallery > > solutions or flickr. So perhaps it shouldn't be able to 'group' items. > But > > if it should, that could be built as well, though perhaps it should have > a > > flickr organizr page for doing more advanced stuff like that.
> That brings up my hope for not *replacing* Gallery, but for > *integrating* nicely with a local Gallery installation. Since Gallery > provides heirarchical organization of photos, and so does your > server's file system, perhaps we should allow that kind of navigation > within that system, too.
> I still would like to keep it simple. I think that the stream of media > works fine as a default and inside directories, but I would also like > a way to navigate among the directories. Think of it like categories > versus tags. Everything gets categorized into directories and tags > are optional. We have a way to get at the tags, but now we need a way > to navigate the categories.
Michael Heilemann wrote: > Well, for folders I guess you could just do folder 'items', that when you > double-click them takes you down into the folder, replacing the current > items with the folders items... Shouldn't be too hard.
> That said, I personally prefer the purity and simplicity of a single layer.
> The problem is providing another layer of control for putting items into > folders and what not.
> I'll soak my brain in it later on. There might be a suave solution to it > hiding in the back of my brain :P
> On 1/23/07, Owen Winkler <epit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 1/23/07, Michael Heilemann <heilem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I think it should work sans JS by removing the media library. The kind > > of > > > media library functionality that can be done without JS is really > > pointless > > > IMHO. And also I don't think it is too much to ask that people have JS > > > enabled if they are doing 'advanced' blogging.
> > I don't think this is unreasonable, but we should decide what we're > > going to support to what level so that it can be documented.
> > > Well, first of all, I didn't intend to entirely replace proper gallery > > > solutions or flickr. So perhaps it shouldn't be able to 'group' items. > > But > > > if it should, that could be built as well, though perhaps it should have > > a > > > flickr organizr page for doing more advanced stuff like that.
> > That brings up my hope for not *replacing* Gallery, but for > > *integrating* nicely with a local Gallery installation. Since Gallery > > provides heirarchical organization of photos, and so does your > > server's file system, perhaps we should allow that kind of navigation > > within that system, too.
> > I still would like to keep it simple. I think that the stream of media > > works fine as a default and inside directories, but I would also like > > a way to navigate among the directories. Think of it like categories > > versus tags. Everything gets categorized into directories and tags > > are optional. We have a way to get at the tags, but now we need a way > > to navigate the categories.
Michael Heilemann wrote: > > Well, for folders I guess you could just do folder 'items', that when > you > > double-click them takes you down into the folder, replacing the current > > items with the folders items... Shouldn't be too hard.
> > That said, I personally prefer the purity and simplicity of a single > layer.
> > The problem is providing another layer of control for putting items into > > folders and what not.
> > I'll soak my brain in it later on. There might be a suave solution to it > > hiding in the back of my brain :P
> > On 1/23/07, Owen Winkler <epit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 1/23/07, Michael Heilemann <heilem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I think it should work sans JS by removing the media library. The > kind > > > of > > > > media library functionality that can be done without JS is really > > > pointless > > > > IMHO. And also I don't think it is too much to ask that people have > JS > > > > enabled if they are doing 'advanced' blogging.
> > > I don't think this is unreasonable, but we should decide what we're > > > going to support to what level so that it can be documented.
> > > > Well, first of all, I didn't intend to entirely replace proper > gallery > > > > solutions or flickr. So perhaps it shouldn't be able to 'group' > items. > > > But > > > > if it should, that could be built as well, though perhaps it should > have > > > a > > > > flickr organizr page for doing more advanced stuff like that.
> > > That brings up my hope for not *replacing* Gallery, but for > > > *integrating* nicely with a local Gallery installation. Since Gallery > > > provides heirarchical organization of photos, and so does your > > > server's file system, perhaps we should allow that kind of navigation > > > within that system, too.
> > > I still would like to keep it simple. I think that the stream of media > > > works fine as a default and inside directories, but I would also like > > > a way to navigate among the directories. Think of it like categories > > > versus tags. Everything gets categorized into directories and tags > > > are optional. We have a way to get at the tags, but now we need a way > > > to navigate the categories.
On 1/23/07, Michael Heilemann <heilem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, for folders I guess you could just do folder 'items', that when you > double-click them takes you down into the folder, replacing the current > items with the folders items... Shouldn't be too hard.
That seems fine with me, but I suspect you have a better solution tucked away in your brain waiting to be found, yet.
> That said, I personally prefer the purity and simplicity of a single layer.
And you'll have it by means of the way you organize your media. For us crazy folder-using folk, we get what we need, too. Win-win.
> The problem is providing another layer of control for putting items into > folders and what not.
I don't know that we need to focus on manipulating the media that closely. It would be nice, but I'd rather that the management system that controls the media be used for that. Habari's management of native files shouldn't need to do this.
I really like this and I can see why you were excited about it all :). I'm not going to comment until you've finished off everything to be honest. My main concern is making sure that it's possible to upload media even without a mouse, I most definitely don't want to fall down that nasty road, but definitely VERY cool idea of splitting the panel and having all the goodness from behind, really love that.
I obviously like the stylised horizontal scroll bar but the arrows on either side should provide scrolling functionality as well which I think is enough even if the end user doesn't know/can't use the scroller.
Regarding the folders, maybe a second tier above the titles of the actual names of the media. I can play around with that actually and tie it in with the latest mockup I'm about to send through.
On 1/23/07, Marko Mihelcic <mcposei...@gmail.com> wrote:
In my opinion folders are following the path of the dodo bird. I feel like all files should just be in the root and organized using tags. Then you could have a a filter text box where you could type in tags and it would narrow down the files.
On Jan 23, 2:06 pm, "Michael Heilemann" <heilem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/23/07, binarymelon <r...@binarymelon.com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure if tags were going to be a part of the media manager or > > not. But if they are why just include a filter.They are. But I don't understand what you're getting at?
> Michael Heilemann wrote: > > > Well, for folders I guess you could just do folder 'items', that when > > you > > > double-click them takes you down into the folder, replacing the current > > > items with the folders items... Shouldn't be too hard.
> > > That said, I personally prefer the purity and simplicity of a single > > layer.
> > > The problem is providing another layer of control for putting items into > > > folders and what not.
> > > I'll soak my brain in it later on. There might be a suave solution to it > > > hiding in the back of my brain :P
> > > On 1/23/07, Owen Winkler <epit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 1/23/07, Michael Heilemann <heilem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I think it should work sans JS by removing the media library. The > > kind > > > > of > > > > > media library functionality that can be done without JS is really > > > > pointless > > > > > IMHO. And also I don't think it is too much to ask that people have > > JS > > > > > enabled if they are doing 'advanced' blogging.
> > > > I don't think this is unreasonable, but we should decide what we're > > > > going to support to what level so that it can be documented.
> > > > > Well, first of all, I didn't intend to entirely replace proper > > gallery > > > > > solutions or flickr. So perhaps it shouldn't be able to 'group' > > items. > > > > But > > > > > if it should, that could be built as well, though perhaps it should > > have > > > > a > > > > > flickr organizr page for doing more advanced stuff like that.
> > > > That brings up my hope for not *replacing* Gallery, but for > > > > *integrating* nicely with a local Gallery installation. Since Gallery > > > > provides heirarchical organization of photos, and so does your > > > > server's file system, perhaps we should allow that kind of navigation > > > > within that system, too.
> > > > I still would like to keep it simple. I think that the stream of media > > > > works fine as a default and inside directories, but I would also like > > > > a way to navigate among the directories. Think of it like categories > > > > versus tags. Everything gets categorized into directories and tags > > > > are optional. We have a way to get at the tags, but now we need a way > > > > to navigate the categories.
On 1/24/07, binarymelon <r...@binarymelon.com> wrote:
> In my opinion folders are following the path of the dodo bird. I feel > like all files should just be in the root and organized using tags. > Then you could have a a filter text box where you could type in tags > and it would narrow down the files.
Which is a fine thought except that when media is uploadeded via FTP it does not have tags and does have directory structure. Similarly, you can organize your photos in dicrtories using other photo album tools, which Habari should be able to deal with gracefully. It would be unwise to overlook these legacy organization structures.
You can tag photos just like entries, and the media library should have great tag browsing capabilities. After you've uploaded your photos, the 'scanner' traverses directories, picking up all photos. Photos located in folders are automatically tagged with the name of that folder, prefixed with 'folder:'.
So if you upload a folder called 'birthday2005', all photos in that folder will be tagged 'folder:birthday2005'.
That would solve all issues for me, personally.
On 1/24/07, Owen Winkler <epit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/24/07, binarymelon <r...@binarymelon.com> wrote:
> > In my opinion folders are following the path of the dodo bird. I feel > > like all files should just be in the root and organized using tags. > > Then you could have a a filter text box where you could type in tags > > and it would narrow down the files.
> Which is a fine thought except that when media is uploadeded via FTP > it does not have tags and does have directory structure. Similarly, > you can organize your photos in dicrtories using other photo album > tools, which Habari should be able to deal with gracefully. It would > be unwise to overlook these legacy organization structures.
