Photo title location and page title tags

[MikeCaine]

I upgraded from version 1.5RC4 to version 2.01 yesterday and I have a few issues that I'm trying to work through. Some are covered in other threads but one that I have is as follows -

On the straightforward photo view page the photo title is displayed under the photo. On the slideshow pages the photo title is displayed above the photo. What do I need to alter to make that consistent?

On the straightforward photo view page the page title tag just displays the photo name. On the slideshow pages the page title tag displayeds the photo name, the photographer's name and the gallery name, which is the way that I prefer it. What do I need to alter to make that consistent?

Thanks

Mike

[cferrero]

On the straightforward photo view page the photo title is displayed under the photo. On the slideshow pages the photo title is displayed above the photo. What do I need to alter to make that consistent?
Go to Styles, then select the Style you are using from the drop-down at the top of the page.

Then scroll down to Photo: Content template and edit this.

After <div class="ee_microthumb_navigation">
<div class="ee_navigation_microthumbs">
<?php print $navthumb_previous_html; ?>
<?php print $navthumb_this_html; ?>
<?php print $navthumb_next_html; ?>
</div>
</div>
paste the following:
<h1 class="ee_photo_header ee_css_header_large">
<?php print $photoheader_html; ?>
</h1>
<br class="clear" />

This will put the photo name above the photo. You should then remove the $photoheader_html section which is repeated further down in the same file, unless you want the name to appear both above and below the image.

[MikeCaine]

Thanks for that!

While looking around in the styles section I notice that the photo page uses

<title><?php print $photoheader_html; ?></title>

for the title, and the slide show page uses

<title><?php print $browser_title_html; ?></title>

for the title.

To solve my other "problem" I used the title coding from the slide show and copied it into place for the individual photo so that now both titles are consistent.

I now need to go through some of the other pages and their templates as I find some of the page titles a bit terse and not search engine friendly, e.g. just "Gear" for the gear page

[::John::]

Thanks for this, guys. Very helpful.

I also wanted the photo description at the top (and centered) and have managed it in a round-about way with really bad coding.

See examples here:

http://www.kiwi-in-oz.com/pictures/photo.php?photo=1041&exhibition=43&ee_lang=eng&u=54,0

Basically, I look to see if field $description_text_html contains data. If it does, I print the tag. If it doesn't, I print a BR

To center the tag text, I modified the CSS file, removing the float: left; and replacing it with text-align: center;

Hope this is useful.

[batleys]

Additionally you may want to set up a simple table construct at the top of photo style page. If you use a rowspan "2" in the right hand column - where you would put navigation micro thumb code, you can then put the title in the column 1 row 1 and location in column 1 row 2 and this way if you use vertical microthumbs mixed with horizontal micro thumbs in the navigation display - you can prevent the photo title mving up and down as you navigate through the images - its what I do and in works a treat and get you closer to that 1.5 appearance for the photo display.

Example: http://www.suffolkimages.com/ee2/photo.php?photo=83&exhibition=8&ee_lang=eng&u=186,4

[cferrero]

Batleys: your site looks a little odd under Firefox 2.0...take a look at this screencap:
http://cferrero.net/sitegfx/suffolkimages_screencap.png
Is this your intention?

[wkitty42]

that's wierd... i don't get that when i view in FF 1.5.0.8... in your screen cap, i don't see the frame around that image that i see when viewing it right now (at the time of this writting)... i also can't make a screen cap as you have because my screen isn't that large (1024x768 on this box and monitor)... in fact, what you show has a completely different background than what i'm seeing...

surely this isn't just a CSS issue??

[wkitty42]

hey simon, i'll quietly point out that you have misspelled copyright in the footer on the page in question... it is missing the "p" ;)

[cferrero]

Well it's improved a bit now:
http://cferrero.net/sitegfx/suffolkscreencap2.png

The SuffolkImages header still looks a little strange though.

[batleys]

Batleys: your site looks a little odd under Firefox 2.0...take a look at this screencap:
http://cferrero.net/sitegfx/suffolkimages_screencap.png
Is this your intention?

Hey thanks for this - no that is certainly not my intention :(

I have just tested this through IE6 - I'm keeping of IE7 until Microsoft resolve many of compatability issues with Java scripted sites. I guess I'll need to download Firefox 2.0

[batleys]

hey simon, i'll quietly point out that you have misspelled copyright in the footer on the page in question... it is missing the "p" ;)

Hey thanks - thankgoodness this is still my development site, and hopefully my production site doesn't have these typos....... :-0

( www.suffolkimages.com )

[batleys]

Well it's improved a bit now:
http://cferrero.net/sitegfx/suffolkscreencap2.png

The SuffolkImages header still looks a little strange though.

No this is still very wrong.... I wonder if this something to do with interpretation of CSS. I use CSS to make the nav microthumbs positioned absolutely within the main page block, that way if there are landscape or portrait micro thumbs displayed, the navigation mcirothumbs don't move up and down as you navigate through.

[wkitty42]

i suspect very much that it is CSS interpretation... what browser(s) do you use to check and verify your results? i use an old mozilla along with the latest firefox and lastly i also use a version of IE6 (that apparently does not have a problem with the leading xml line)... i don't have opera here yet but i do plan on getting a copy and also using it to test with... in addition to these windows based browsers, i also have a couple on a kubuntu install on another machine... that way i can also test across platforms...

sheesh, i just realized that i actually have four seperate platforms here and a couple of them are in several flavors (ie: kubuntu, debian, mandrake would be three flavors of linux)

[batleys]

I was using just IE6, but now also Firefox 2.0 - given the suggestion above. However the problem boiled down to that I had a missing bracket within the CSS code. When recovering form bad html the browsers do appear to behave differently - however solution is therefore not to write out bad html.....

[wkitty42]

yup! a missing bracket would cause some very strange results in CSS interpretation ;)