|
|
Rank: Devotee
Joined: 8/23/2007
Posts: 44
|
Hello,
I have recently installed umbraco v3, and almost the first thing I came up against was image handling. So far I have found four different ways of putting an image into an item:
** Upload using the "Media" section, then set up a field using the Mediapicker datatype.
** Set up a field using the Upload datatype. Confusingly, this needs different code in the template to insert the result into the page.
(Also one needs to know in advance whether the user wants to reuse an existing image or upload a new one before deciding which of these two datatypes to use, which is tricky.)
**Use Kasper B's Multiple mediapicker, which looks as if it might solve the above problems, except that it does not (currently) work on v3.
** Use the image function within the TinyMCE WYSIWYG editor. This allows either reuse of an existing image, or upload, plus a number of very useful formatting functions. It does however embed the image into a text field, and removes full control from the template code over how to render it.
(There is also ImageGen which I have not tried to use yet.)
To provide a single consistent user interface, both for images as individual fields and when embedded in text, would it be possible to extract the code which chooses/uploads images into TinyMCE, and package it as a separate datatype so that a single field can behave in the same way as inserting into Rich Text?
Regards, Tony.
|
|
Rank: Umbracoholic
Joined: 9/8/2006
Posts: 1,831
Location: MA, USA
|
Hi, Tony, Welcome to umbraco! I'm not sure what you're trying to do or where the problem lies. Basically, what you've outlined is the flexibility to use umbraco to achieve whatever you need, rather than trying to force every use of an image into a single scenario that isn't well-suited to all the possible usage scenarios. Generally speaking, it is best to put images in the Media section. The only time I would suggest otherwise would be if you had a large number of images that are only *ever* handled by a macro and never need to be selected (or updated) by the user, but that's another issue. With your image in the media section, you can: insert it into the rich text editor, select it with the mediapicker on another tab of the editor based on the document type's properties' data type, put it in a template, or get it with an XSLT macro that might be used in a template and/or in the RTE. BTW, ImageGen is a tool for resizing images on-the-fly (among other things) and is used within templates and macros, not within the RTE directly. cheers, doug.
MVP 2007-2009 - Percipient Studios
|
|
Rank: Devotee
Joined: 8/23/2007
Posts: 44
|
Thanks Doug,
Essentially my issue is about usability. I agree that there is a great deal of flexibility in the system, but the various mechanisms do not present a unified interface to the user.
The scenario I have in mind is that I would like to give my users a document type which, among other things, contains a field into which they can place an image - to be formatted in a standard way by the template.
If I use a mediaPicker, then the user has to remember to go through the separate process of uploading the image(s) they want in advance, using the Media section. (Also while doing this they have to enter the name of the image before browsing for it, when maybe they need to do the browsing to even decide which one to use.) Further the mediaPicker control does not show a thumbnail, making it difficult to be sure one has got the image one expected.
If I use an Upload datatype, then the user is prevented from reusing an image that has already been uploaded, which they will want to do some of the time. Further, a new uploaded is not (I presume) added to the database so is not available for reuse.
To extend the scenario, my users will also have the use of rich text fields, and the TinyMCE editor, with its inbuilt image handler. This does all the things that the previous two methods did, without the disadvantages (as far as I can see). It allows the user either to reuse an existing image, or to upload a new one which is then available for reuse. It would be a significant step in usability (in my opinion) if there were a single datatype which did what the TinyMCE editor function does in this regard, and presented the same interface to the user. I could then use the flexibility of the behind-the-scenes functions to do what I liked with it.
Regards, Tony.
|
|
Rank: Aficionado
Joined: 6/25/2007
Posts: 146
Location: Malmo, Sweden
|
Tony Maynard-Smith wrote:To extend the scenario, my users will also have the use of rich text fields, and the TinyMCE editor, with its inbuilt image handler. This does all the things that the previous two methods did, without the disadvantages (as far as I can see). It allows the user either to reuse an existing image, or to upload a new one which is then available for reuse. It would be a significant step in usability (in my opinion) if there were a single datatype which did what the TinyMCE editor function does in this regard, and presented the same interface to the user. I could then use the flexibility of the behind-the-scenes functions to do what I liked with it. I agree totally. I have been missing that functionality too.
Is it me or umbraco? Umbraco Certified Professional Level 2.
|
|
Rank: Addict
Joined: 3/17/2008
Posts: 982
Location: Nyborg, Denmark
|
Excellent idea, could you add it to the issue tracker at Codeplex with a detailed description and I'll add it to the 3.x roadmap: http://www.codeplex.com/umbraco/WorkItem/Create.aspxCheers, Niels...
Jeeeez, did I really start this :-)
|
|
Rank: Devotee
Joined: 8/23/2007
Posts: 44
|
Thanks for your encouragement. I have actually been having some second thoughts about this, maybe because I do not understand enough about Umbraco's database structure. The TinyMCE facility allows the user to set a variety of attributes, including image size, but also alignment, margin, etc. I don't know how these could/should be handled on a single image field, and in any case the scenario I have in mind would probably want to set most of these (except alternate text, and perhaps size) in the template or stylesheet, rather than letting the user do so. I suppose what I really want is more like the functionality that appears to be in Kasper B's Multiple Mediapicker, http://kasperb.dk/2006/10/29/multiple-mediapicker-for-umbraco.aspx. If it could look like the TinyMCE interface that would be a bonus, but its not a major issue. Unfortunately this does not (yet?) work in v3. Tony.
|
|
Rank: Devotee
Joined: 8/23/2007
Posts: 44
|
Following these thoughts, I have now done a first version of a Media Picker along the above lines. See http://forum.umbraco.org/extending-umbraco/yet-another-media-picker-with-upload. Regards, Tony.
|
|
|
Guest |