"Expand All" Link
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: "Expand All" Link

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    174

    "Expand All" Link

    I tried searching, but didn't see a previous thread on this topic, so here I go...

    Wouldn't it be better to have the "Expand All" link iterate through a javascript loop to expand each post (in much the same way we do when we click on the + symbol)? I would think this would create two distinct benefits:

    1) Faster expansion in the browser.
    2) Less load on the server.

    Since the text from each post is already loaded when you view the thread, you could cut the additional load on the server and the user could get faster expansion of the posts.

    Just a thought!
    Mike Reilly
    bluebeard96@yahoo.com

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    393
    Would it be worth ?
    It wouldnt make much of a difference to the server as the text is already loaded, and would you want to press the "+" everytime you view a thread to expand all threads ?

    In my view, it would add to only extra coding,so don't think it'd make much of a difference. Anyway, that's just my opinion.
    \"I have a 386 Pentium.\"

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    174
    Invader... as it currently works, the "Expand All" link RELOADS the entire page and adds a tag to the URL saying "&display=show". When you click on the "+" for your post, it runs this javascript: onclick="contract(p589615e);expand(p589615h);". Since the text is pre-loaded and the javascript is being run on the client side, it would work much faster than the current method (making a new page request and downloading all the posts again). I'm just recommending that the expand all link, rather than being an actual page request, be modified to do an onclick=contract/expand([all posts numbers]). Not sure of the syntax, but it's easily done.
    Mike Reilly
    bluebeard96@yahoo.com

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    393
    hm bluebeard, i have not done this before, so i do not know the practicality of the suggestion.
    I believe it could be tried, of course, if people agree that this would save time.
    \"I have a 386 Pentium.\"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •