Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

19 Good

About bartelsmedia

  • Rank
    Full Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thank you very much for the module. Based on latest EU legislation, cookie consent requests must default to NO. However, if clicking the X in the top-right of the cookie consent dialog, it seems to default to YES: 02-10-_2019_10-23-18.mp4 But it is even worse: In the cookie consent management, no choice is indicated, leaving visitors clueless, whether cookies are stored (while they actually are). This really seems to be a bug which can bring users into troube. Could you please update the module, so that no cookies are allowed until the user expressly agreed to it?
  2. DeepL is such a strange company. Arising like Phoenix from the Ashes with a beyond mind-staggering service but sales/marketing appears quite autistic for my taste. Apparently, they seem not to be looking for the small fishes. If I would be them, I would offer an affiliate business, motivating guys like you making a module and participate from each use. Conspiracy theory: DeepL actually is a Google front. Perhaps for legal reasons. Just wild speculation. Mark my words. You read it here first. 😉
  3. I really don't want to nit-pick, but sending the domain of "jon@jondonson.com" would still create a privacy issue. *sigh* Yes, I know, it is pedantic but GDPR legislation is harsh now.
  4. Ah, what a fail. Sorry, wasn't aware of this. Too sad. It would be extremely useful.
  5. Such list should be pulled by Processwire. Otherwise, you would need to pass user email addresses to (unknown?!) third party. GDPR alert! 🙂 .
  6. http://littlesvr.ca/apng/gif_apng_webp.html This guy put animated WebP to test with somehow disappointing results. Is the test flawed? What are your experiences?
  7. Now for some cold hard facts: Screenshot with Retina resolution (21KB after TinyPNG optimization): The same but rescaled screenshot to 1x resolution (also 21KB after TinyPNG optimization): Why would I want to generate smaller variations of a screenshot with half the dimensions but almost the identical file size? I know, that the results depend on the nature of screenshots. Above comparison would fail if the screenshot would contain horizontal color fades or photo-realistic contents. But for such general screenshots it would be better to only serve the original without variations.
  8. Interesting read, thanks. I still think, it is not necessary to provide different bitmap files in the special case of screenshots. We do screenshots in Retina resolution. Due to the large amount of white space in screenshots, those compress quite well with PNG. Example: http://www.keyboard-and-mouse-sharing.com/screenshots.htm Browsers resize those Retina bitmaps quite well for displays with non-Retina resolution. It would be more data transfer to serve multiple bitmap file variations rather than using one single file that is resized by the browser.
  9. Sure, just kindly meant as a suggestion to add this to the offered presets.
  10. I am not referring to uploading bitmaps in the Processwire backend. I mean the front end bitmap delivery. In \site\assets\files\... I see many variations created that I actually don't need:
  11. Thanks for the very useful module. Just one issue: Either cookie banner placement has its issues: If placed on top, it gets in the way with the main nav. If placed in the bottom, it may overlay the important "imprint" link often placed in the sub-footer. How about a small box in the lower left or right?:
  12. Modern browser can resize bitmaps on the client site quite well. So, shouldn't the Processwire image resize be disabled to reduce additional http requests (if the user resizes viewport)? Do I miss something? Should/can it be disabled?
  13. The autocomplete feature of the "link insert" is absurdly useful. However it quickly becomes flooded with similar sounding pages in my setup. Is there a way to filter/exclude certain branches of the page tree from here? I tried this setting for the unwanted "/menu/" branch but it still shows up: In an ideal world, each "insert link" dialog would be customizable. Example: The "insert page"dialog fro a page under "/faq/" would show only URL matches of page tree branch "/tech/", etc. Does this make sense?
  14. Yes, this is a very cool module, that is already in place. However, I am sorry to say, that the workflow to copy just a repeater is more complex than a simple "copy & paste". ;-)
  15. Great, will have a look. As you mention, it really should be a core feature. It just doesn't make sense to limit the copy&paste scope to one page.
  • Create New...