I agree with the statement that elgg needs FORUM. Its not just me... and you. I managed 1000 members... most of them say that the community needs a FORUM feature. I know that group discussion can be a replacement. But thats totally different.

A community needs forum. Period.

we don't need no forums instead of intuition
we don't need no group postings going out of control
no dark sarcasm in the CMS gloom
Elggsters - leave then site users alone
Hey coders - leave them kiddies alone
All in all it'd just another post on the wall
All in all it'd just another post on the wall

"wall" in social networking sites is copyrighted by facebook as an electronic messaging system.  You will be hearing from their lawyers shortly

I agree with the statement that elgg needs FORUM. Its not just me... and you. I managed 1000 members... most of them say that the community needs a FORUM feature. I know that group discussion can be a replacement. But thats totally different.

A community needs forum. Period.

we don't need no forums instead of intuition
we don't need no group postings going out of control
no dark sarcasm in the CMS gloom
Elggsters - leave then site users alone
Hey coders - leave them kiddies alone
All in all it'd just another post on the wall
All in all it'd just another post on the wall

"wall" in social networking sites is copyrighted by facebook as an electronic messaging system.  You will be hearing from their lawyers shortly

I agree with the statement that elgg needs FORUM. Its not just me... and you. I managed 1000 members... most of them say that the community needs a FORUM feature. I know that group discussion can be a replacement. But thats totally different.

A community needs forum. Period.

we don't need no forums instead of intuition
we don't need no group postings going out of control
no dark sarcasm in the CMS gloom
Elggsters - leave then site users alone
Hey coders - leave them kiddies alone
All in all it'd just another post on the wall
All in all it'd just another post on the wall

"wall" in social networking sites is copyrighted by facebook as an electronic messaging system.  You will be hearing from their lawyers shortly

I get complaints about the (left) menus sometimes too. E.g. in a group there is a "Group pages" and "Group disussion" to the left. But when selecting the "group pages" link the discussion link goes away. It's similar on other places too.

I think the problem lies with mixing "all stuff related to this group" vs "mine/friends/others/all content within this plugin" in the menu. If the group is considered the  main thingie, then the menu must be constant here, preferably indicate what menu item is selected too.

How about creating an Elgg object "menu", in which plugins can add their options to that menu, and then the menu could have several views, like toolbar, etc.

Many plugins have to use hardcoded URL's which makes it really bad for maintenance purposes.

Regards,
Uddhava dasa

Can you create a menu tool kit for the admin? position, link structure, etc.

I would like to bring up my groups when I use the toolbar Tools>Groups instead of going to site groups.

I like the menu toolbar, unobtrusive and neat. However that same like was the problem at the start because it is not the norm. It took me a few visits to first notice and then to remember it was there.

Please dont destroy the nice celan feel elgg has but someone create a toolkit to give options.

Has anyone looked at Googlewave yet?  Since we (elgg community) really haven't moved anything forward with regard to federation, if you haven't seen GoogleWave's proposed/planned federation protocol, it may help with future discussions/consideration for federating elggs as well as with googlewave.

http://www.waveprotocol.org

http://www.waveprotocol.org/wave-community-principles

I'm just getting started to reading/understanding this so I dont have much opinion on it at this point other than perhaps we go with the flow?  Just wanted to share early so we can have an intelligent, informed and lively discussion.

Hello, I push up this interresting topic...

Why don't you use the same system that Status.net is using. Servers easilly exchange data and a logged user on server A can subscribe to friend on server B without creating an account on server B.

I find this system very usefull.

Why everybody uses Facebook ? because everybody uses Facebook. If different elgg servers could communicate, a user could create an account on his preferred (or own) one and then accessed to his friend information even if he use a different one. I think a notice in the river could be sufficent, inviting the reader to click and go to the second server to see the detail.

It seems to be a decentralized social network system and every elgg server would be more attractive.

I am intersted in this or Multisite.  Has anyone been working on this any further?

Has anyone looked at Googlewave yet?  Since we (elgg community) really haven't moved anything forward with regard to federation, if you haven't seen GoogleWave's proposed/planned federation protocol, it may help with future discussions/consideration for federating elggs as well as with googlewave.

http://www.waveprotocol.org

http://www.waveprotocol.org/wave-community-principles

I'm just getting started to reading/understanding this so I dont have much opinion on it at this point other than perhaps we go with the flow?  Just wanted to share early so we can have an intelligent, informed and lively discussion.

Hello, I push up this interresting topic...

Why don't you use the same system that Status.net is using. Servers easilly exchange data and a logged user on server A can subscribe to friend on server B without creating an account on server B.

I find this system very usefull.

Why everybody uses Facebook ? because everybody uses Facebook. If different elgg servers could communicate, a user could create an account on his preferred (or own) one and then accessed to his friend information even if he use a different one. I think a notice in the river could be sufficent, inviting the reader to click and go to the second server to see the detail.

It seems to be a decentralized social network system and every elgg server would be more attractive.

I am intersted in this or Multisite.  Has anyone been working on this any further?

Has anyone looked at Googlewave yet?  Since we (elgg community) really haven't moved anything forward with regard to federation, if you haven't seen GoogleWave's proposed/planned federation protocol, it may help with future discussions/consideration for federating elggs as well as with googlewave.

http://www.waveprotocol.org

http://www.waveprotocol.org/wave-community-principles

I'm just getting started to reading/understanding this so I dont have much opinion on it at this point other than perhaps we go with the flow?  Just wanted to share early so we can have an intelligent, informed and lively discussion.

Hello, I push up this interresting topic...

Why don't you use the same system that Status.net is using. Servers easilly exchange data and a logged user on server A can subscribe to friend on server B without creating an account on server B.

I find this system very usefull.

Why everybody uses Facebook ? because everybody uses Facebook. If different elgg servers could communicate, a user could create an account on his preferred (or own) one and then accessed to his friend information even if he use a different one. I think a notice in the river could be sufficent, inviting the reader to click and go to the second server to see the detail.

It seems to be a decentralized social network system and every elgg server would be more attractive.

I am intersted in this or Multisite.  Has anyone been working on this any further?

Has anyone looked at Googlewave yet?  Since we (elgg community) really haven't moved anything forward with regard to federation, if you haven't seen GoogleWave's proposed/planned federation protocol, it may help with future discussions/consideration for federating elggs as well as with googlewave.

http://www.waveprotocol.org

http://www.waveprotocol.org/wave-community-principles

I'm just getting started to reading/understanding this so I dont have much opinion on it at this point other than perhaps we go with the flow?  Just wanted to share early so we can have an intelligent, informed and lively discussion.

Hello, I push up this interresting topic...

Why don't you use the same system that Status.net is using. Servers easilly exchange data and a logged user on server A can subscribe to friend on server B without creating an account on server B.

I find this system very usefull.

Why everybody uses Facebook ? because everybody uses Facebook. If different elgg servers could communicate, a user could create an account on his preferred (or own) one and then accessed to his friend information even if he use a different one. I think a notice in the river could be sufficent, inviting the reader to click and go to the second server to see the detail.

It seems to be a decentralized social network system and every elgg server would be more attractive.

I am intersted in this or Multisite.  Has anyone been working on this any further?

@Zakary I couldn't agree more with what you just said. I see 2 things being very important.

1. Selective input. Meaning I choose the sites I am connected to. Maybe someday having a directory of elgg sites to choose from would be cool.

2. Ability to 'opt out' or not start in the first place. In other words, don't ever make elgg cloud linking to everyone a requirement or you end up with the ning issue. I can't describe how many people I know who run sites on ning who were more than upset that their users were sent emails and auto imported into ning.com a few months back. -Obviously huge difference as ning is propriatary where elgg is open, which is why I'm here in the first place.

you said the N word shhhhhh! horrid nightmares.

Please dont forget the poor lonley user that wants to make a business out of their site. I don't want people friending others on another site, well unless I run it. I want them to register in mine so i can get more revenue. yes greedy dollar signs in my eyes, but don't worry I plan on paying regular homage to the elgg gods.

Now for educational sites it would be a god send of useful information links, heralding back to the very beginings of what Internet really meant.

So yes market your ElggNet in that way and you have the winner!

"ElggNet - what the Internet was intended for" quote Me :D

Has anyone looked at Googlewave yet?  Since we (elgg community) really haven't moved anything forward with regard to federation, if you haven't seen GoogleWave's proposed/planned federation protocol, it may help with future discussions/consideration for federating elggs as well as with googlewave.

http://www.waveprotocol.org

http://www.waveprotocol.org/wave-community-principles

I'm just getting started to reading/understanding this so I dont have much opinion on it at this point other than perhaps we go with the flow?  Just wanted to share early so we can have an intelligent, informed and lively discussion.

Hello, I push up this interresting topic...

Why don't you use the same system that Status.net is using. Servers easilly exchange data and a logged user on server A can subscribe to friend on server B without creating an account on server B.

I find this system very usefull.

Why everybody uses Facebook ? because everybody uses Facebook. If different elgg servers could communicate, a user could create an account on his preferred (or own) one and then accessed to his friend information even if he use a different one. I think a notice in the river could be sufficent, inviting the reader to click and go to the second server to see the detail.

It seems to be a decentralized social network system and every elgg server would be more attractive.

I am intersted in this or Multisite.  Has anyone been working on this any further?

Has anyone looked at Googlewave yet?  Since we (elgg community) really haven't moved anything forward with regard to federation, if you haven't seen GoogleWave's proposed/planned federation protocol, it may help with future discussions/consideration for federating elggs as well as with googlewave.

http://www.waveprotocol.org

http://www.waveprotocol.org/wave-community-principles

I'm just getting started to reading/understanding this so I dont have much opinion on it at this point other than perhaps we go with the flow?  Just wanted to share early so we can have an intelligent, informed and lively discussion.

Hello, I push up this interresting topic...

Why don't you use the same system that Status.net is using. Servers easilly exchange data and a logged user on server A can subscribe to friend on server B without creating an account on server B.

I find this system very usefull.

Why everybody uses Facebook ? because everybody uses Facebook. If different elgg servers could communicate, a user could create an account on his preferred (or own) one and then accessed to his friend information even if he use a different one. I think a notice in the river could be sufficent, inviting the reader to click and go to the second server to see the detail.

It seems to be a decentralized social network system and every elgg server would be more attractive.

I am intersted in this or Multisite.  Has anyone been working on this any further?

I agree with the statement that elgg needs FORUM. Its not just me... and you. I managed 1000 members... most of them say that the community needs a FORUM feature. I know that group discussion can be a replacement. But thats totally different.

A community needs forum. Period.

we don't need no forums instead of intuition
we don't need no group postings going out of control
no dark sarcasm in the CMS gloom
Elggsters - leave then site users alone
Hey coders - leave them kiddies alone
All in all it'd just another post on the wall
All in all it'd just another post on the wall

"wall" in social networking sites is copyrighted by facebook as an electronic messaging system.  You will be hearing from their lawyers shortly

i have been continuing to theme.

http://demo.homecliq.com if anyone is interested. there are now some definate differences going on between either a mobile or pc based viewing of the site, although not on the initial index.

I have user validation by email turned off if you happen to have a mobile device or emulator and want to see what it is I am working on.

Well, I couldn't wait for other iPhone plugins, so I wrote my own!  This is my first contribution so be gentle!

http://community.elgg.org/pg/plugins/alextanchoco/read/259385/themer-01-beta-iphone-theme-with-personalization-of-colors

Elgg Mobile has now been released. http://community.elgg.org/mod/plugins/read.php?guid=387453

i have been continuing to theme.

http://demo.homecliq.com if anyone is interested. there are now some definate differences going on between either a mobile or pc based viewing of the site, although not on the initial index.

I have user validation by email turned off if you happen to have a mobile device or emulator and want to see what it is I am working on.

Well, I couldn't wait for other iPhone plugins, so I wrote my own!  This is my first contribution so be gentle!

http://community.elgg.org/pg/plugins/alextanchoco/read/259385/themer-01-beta-iphone-theme-with-personalization-of-colors

Elgg Mobile has now been released. http://community.elgg.org/mod/plugins/read.php?guid=387453

i have been continuing to theme.

http://demo.homecliq.com if anyone is interested. there are now some definate differences going on between either a mobile or pc based viewing of the site, although not on the initial index.

I have user validation by email turned off if you happen to have a mobile device or emulator and want to see what it is I am working on.

Well, I couldn't wait for other iPhone plugins, so I wrote my own!  This is my first contribution so be gentle!

http://community.elgg.org/pg/plugins/alextanchoco/read/259385/themer-01-beta-iphone-theme-with-personalization-of-colors

Elgg Mobile has now been released. http://community.elgg.org/mod/plugins/read.php?guid=387453

I think this could be worth discussing. I've seen a few cases of plugins in the full elgg distribution where the custom styles in each mod are duplicating styles that are set in the core css file. It would be nice to see a more consistent style driven from the core, so someone who isn't a css expert could subtly change the core theme without breaking the overall look and feel. Someone with better css skills probably should be able to handle the additional complication of changing the plugin styles on a more ad-hoc basis.

Although from what i've seen over the last few releases everything is getting better and better

Also one example of fix i've personally made to my theme's css (that overrides the core - that's i've been meaning to send to pete) is:

.input-checkboxes {

    background-color: #252525;

    border-color:#252525;

}

.contentWrapper, .input-checkboxes {

    background-color: #1C1C1C;

    border-color:#1C1C1C;

}

.input-radio {

    background-color: #252525;

    border-color:#252525;

}

.contentWrapper, .input-radio {

    background-color: #1C1C1C;

    border-color:#1C1C1C;

}

This is a small basic change which lets IE6 correctly set the background colour of checkboxes and radio buttons (please don't get me started on how much I dislike IE6, but a lot of my users still use it), but it's just a small example of how small changes & feedback over time can improve consistency for all users.

It looks to me as though the original way of doing things was to have a single css.php file, whereas subsequently that method has evolved to have separate css.php pages for each plugin. What has never happened (by the looks of it) is breaking up the original css.php page, to populate the core plugins. 

I would suggest, with heinsight, that the best option would be to have the core classes in the main css.php page, and each plugin just define the ones that relate to that. 

As an extension of that, there could be more attention paid to inheriting classes from the base, rather than redefining them, so that subsequent changes to the style wouldn't require quite so much work. 

I've attempted to do that in my own copy, by placing PHP variables in various places, then defining them centrally, so that the styles can change quickly and easily, but to do it properly is a lot of work.  If anyone want's to volunteer, great, otherwise I think we just need to ensure new stuff follows the new style and leave the old stuff alone.

Simon

Related trac ticket: https://trac.elgg.org/elgg/ticket/952

I agree with Don. The current core css makes it difficult to write a plugin without writing custom css. There are very few elements that are generic that can be used. This then makes it difficult to write themes since every plugin has it's own css.

I'd like to see the core css at least define a set of primitives and then have plugin authors encouraged to use them.

i have been continuing to theme.

http://demo.homecliq.com if anyone is interested. there are now some definate differences going on between either a mobile or pc based viewing of the site, although not on the initial index.

I have user validation by email turned off if you happen to have a mobile device or emulator and want to see what it is I am working on.

Well, I couldn't wait for other iPhone plugins, so I wrote my own!  This is my first contribution so be gentle!

http://community.elgg.org/pg/plugins/alextanchoco/read/259385/themer-01-beta-iphone-theme-with-personalization-of-colors

Elgg Mobile has now been released. http://community.elgg.org/mod/plugins/read.php?guid=387453

I think this could be worth discussing. I've seen a few cases of plugins in the full elgg distribution where the custom styles in each mod are duplicating styles that are set in the core css file. It would be nice to see a more consistent style driven from the core, so someone who isn't a css expert could subtly change the core theme without breaking the overall look and feel. Someone with better css skills probably should be able to handle the additional complication of changing the plugin styles on a more ad-hoc basis.

Although from what i've seen over the last few releases everything is getting better and better

Also one example of fix i've personally made to my theme's css (that overrides the core - that's i've been meaning to send to pete) is:

.input-checkboxes {

    background-color: #252525;

    border-color:#252525;

}

.contentWrapper, .input-checkboxes {

    background-color: #1C1C1C;

    border-color:#1C1C1C;

}

.input-radio {

    background-color: #252525;

    border-color:#252525;

}

.contentWrapper, .input-radio {

    background-color: #1C1C1C;

    border-color:#1C1C1C;

}

This is a small basic change which lets IE6 correctly set the background colour of checkboxes and radio buttons (please don't get me started on how much I dislike IE6, but a lot of my users still use it), but it's just a small example of how small changes & feedback over time can improve consistency for all users.

It looks to me as though the original way of doing things was to have a single css.php file, whereas subsequently that method has evolved to have separate css.php pages for each plugin. What has never happened (by the looks of it) is breaking up the original css.php page, to populate the core plugins. 

I would suggest, with heinsight, that the best option would be to have the core classes in the main css.php page, and each plugin just define the ones that relate to that. 

As an extension of that, there could be more attention paid to inheriting classes from the base, rather than redefining them, so that subsequent changes to the style wouldn't require quite so much work. 

I've attempted to do that in my own copy, by placing PHP variables in various places, then defining them centrally, so that the styles can change quickly and easily, but to do it properly is a lot of work.  If anyone want's to volunteer, great, otherwise I think we just need to ensure new stuff follows the new style and leave the old stuff alone.

Simon

Related trac ticket: https://trac.elgg.org/elgg/ticket/952

I agree with Don. The current core css makes it difficult to write a plugin without writing custom css. There are very few elements that are generic that can be used. This then makes it difficult to write themes since every plugin has it's own css.

I'd like to see the core css at least define a set of primitives and then have plugin authors encouraged to use them.

(1)    Spell my name correctly lolz ;-)

(2)    cut/ paste the url - it will work -- because their server must be detecting referrer as elgg.org, gives "404" ==? blocking non wash.edu referrers ;-( happens on my own server too because I have blocked foreign referrers on everything [ hotlink-trap ;-) ]

@dHrup (1) oops %) (2) thx a lot ;)

We plan to use Elgg for our medical network faces.doccheck.com. I asked my friends @ php-ids.org to help us with some crucial security issues, but they're very busy the next 3-4 weeks. So you might want to take a look at their PHP-Intrusion Detection System in the meantime...

LOLZ ;-)
you meet my low-life level sense of humor ;-)

TO ALL OTHERS:

I suggest you all look up those URLS GW has posted - interesting stuff.
I'm gonna be reading this sucka and download and swing this php-IDS thingy..
Meanwhile.. I would encourage all serious elggsters who have any know-how
re: cracking/ trying to crack PKGs such as Elgg to share.. preferably via private
messages -- so that we can *collectively work out better security.
One day soon... Elgg *will hit a higher, more main-stream market penetration :==
*then we better want Elgg to be impenetrable...