google-code-export / camlistore

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/camlistore
Apache License 2.0
0 stars 0 forks source link

UI does not provide a way to get a full-sized source image anymore #541

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
As far as I can tell, for any given image stored in Camlistore, there's no way 
to get the original full-sized image through the UI anymore, only resized 
"thumbnails" of it.

This was still possible through the old permanode page not so long ago, but I 
don't think that page is accessible anymore, is it?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mathieu....@gmail.com on 24 Oct 2014 at 5:21

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I had the same thought last night. This is also the case for other file types, 
right? (not just images: PDF, text file, whatever).

Related question: is there a way from the command line currently to get back to 
the original full-sized image/file (other than FUSE mount)?

Original comment by mail...@gmail.com on 28 Oct 2014 at 9:02

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
yes, camget. (in particular, see -o and -contents options).

Original comment by mathieu....@gmail.com on 28 Oct 2014 at 2:00

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
(edited)
I'll work on this.

I think I'll look into adding something on the 'Image' aspect, which is the 
default landing for an image when you click on the item from the search view. 

Possibly wrapping the image in an anchor and making it clickable to view the 
full size, or adding a link below the image to view original size.

This does seem like something that could be opened up to other file types 
though, and the 'Permanode' aspect is the common thread for all...so maybe 
adding a 'Download' link back to the permanode aspect is the better approach.

Original comment by mail...@gmail.com on 6 Nov 2014 at 1:41

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I could use both, but the second approach (Dowload link) is more important.

I see the 1st one only as a convenience because it is sometimes useful to be 
able to view the full size image in your browser (you want to squint at a 
particular detail of the picture). I'd see it only as a critical feature if 
there's no other way to get the full-size original file.

We should totally have the second approach in the UI at some point (being able 
to download any kind of source file from its permanode), and I agree that a 
link on the permanode aspect seems like a good place for it. Unless Aaron had 
other plans for that?

Anyway, as far as I am concerned either of these approaches fix the issue, but 
if you can do both, or preferentially the 2nd one, then even better.

Original comment by mathieu....@gmail.com on 6 Nov 2014 at 3:20

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
First draft submitted: https://camlistore-review.googlesource.com/#/c/4046/

Mathieu,
Can you take a quick look and see this is what you were looking for?

Original comment by mail...@gmail.com on 6 Nov 2014 at 10:55

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Yep, that works for me, thanks.

Maybe I'd move the link somewhere else on the page so that it stays obviously 
visible even when there's a full page of attributes. But only someone who does 
not know the feature exists would miss it, so that's probably nitpicking.

Original comment by mathieu....@gmail.com on 6 Nov 2014 at 11:15

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
'View original' link added to the sidebar.

Complete and merged:
https://camlistore-review.googlesource.com/#/c/4046/

Original comment by mail...@gmail.com on 1 Dec 2014 at 9:15

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I've just (sorry I didn't sooner) realized something: having this action in the 
sidebar is not the most convenient because we then can't use that action while 
browsing images through the image aspect (with left/right arrows, which should 
work again soon). I suppose I feel that way since my usage is really 
image-centric, and the image aspect is where I spend most of my time in the UI.

Anyway, as far as the issue is concerned, fixed, thanks.

Original comment by mathieu....@gmail.com on 2 Dec 2014 at 2:42

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
999a148b32f864ca9ef93909455a168d0ed747a6 fixed the issue.

Original comment by mathieu....@gmail.com on 2 Dec 2014 at 2:43

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
We could play around with exposing the sidebar on the image aspect, which has 
the benefit of exposing tagging and download in that view (when using arrows to 
navigate).

The downside of that approach is the image will need to be displayed a little 
smaller to accommodate the sidebar.

Original comment by mail...@gmail.com on 2 Dec 2014 at 4:18

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Well then why not only let the sidebar appear on cue, like on the main page? 
the cue could even be the same kind as on the main page, i.e. checkmark on the 
corner of the image?

Original comment by mathieu....@gmail.com on 2 Dec 2014 at 4:21

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
re: having the sidebar appear on command using the checkmark, I'm a little 
concerned about causing confusion as to what the checkmark means. In the other 
views it is used to select (and the sidebar appears as a result of the 
selection). But the case described here seems to be more along the lines of 
'show more stuff about this one.'  Not that having the sidebar show / hide is a 
bad idea, but maybe we should come up with another visual approach to represent 
it.

Anyway, we also talked about thinking of the Image detail aspect as more of a 
generic 'Preview' which is available to other types of  content. So maybe it's 
best that 'Image/Preview' should just stick to previewing, and we should 
consider displaying the sidebar in the 'Permanode' detail aspect, which I think 
would still work for the arrow navigation as it is just one aspect click away.

Original comment by mail...@gmail.com on 2 Dec 2014 at 5:27

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
This issue has moved to https://camlistore.org/issue/541

Original comment by bradfitz on 14 Dec 2014 at 11:37