Mobile support for forums?

[liraz747]

Hi, I really like gentoo and the community, but the forums don't have any mobile supported site, do you guys plan on making one? Because currently It's a really weird experience from mobile

[NeddySeagoon]

liraz747,

Not while we are still on phpBB2.

The upgrade to phpBB3 is in the works and needs some server side things to be worked out. Maybe once the dust has settled after the upgrade.
If you know of a suitable phpBB3 extension, you could post a link here.

[Chiitoo]

The phpBB 3 normally are "responsive", so we'll get support for mobile things "for free" with it. Once we get it.

[Hu]

Why should the forums need a special mobile-version? The existing site is generally light on fancy features like heavy dynamic page generation, which should make it more mobile-friendly than many "modern" sites that consist of a blank page backed by hundreds of kilobytes of Javascript. What in the existing site do mobile browsers not handle well?

[pjp]

What in the existing site do mobile browsers not handle well?

It doesn't scale to the size of the device. A lot of UI elements take up a fixed amount of space that may look fine on a larger screen, but on a phone or ~7" tablet, they become visibly unusable (at least from a practical standpoint if not a literal one).

However, I have no idea how mobile users expect to be able to interact with code tags, even if they have the awful embedded horizontal scrolling window. I can't imagine the requests for help from such limited devices (though I think I have seen some), and I can't imagine how challenging it would be to try helping someone from a mobile device.

I understand the lack of viability of the current design on mobile devices, but I don't understand the expected outcome given the technical orientation of topics rather than "chat" style topics.

[steve_v]

IMO the current layout works just fine on mobile. You just need to zoom to see things.
It's far, far preferable to the current trend for "modern" javascript-laden sites anyway, I'll gladly take static pages and a bit of pinch-zooming over the dynamic-loading CPU-burning garbage we see everywhere else.

I really don't understand the logic behind this "responsive" website design crap TBH. Mobiles are CPU and memory (not to mention power) constrained as much as they are by screen-size, and a site that runs so much javascript that it takes 10 times the resources just to render at a more convenient scale isn't progress. It sure doesn't respond any better either.

Once upon a time "mobile friendly" meant using less bandwidth and CPU time, and that was grand. Apparently now it means the exact opposite, and as an added insult the desktop view on most of these sites is not only equally wasteful of resources, it also comes with enormous blank spaces to either side and oversized UI elements.

If we're going to go to fat-finger design here, please find a way to do it without masses of javascript and without messing up the current and very functional desktop layout.

[Hu]

It doesn't scale to the size of the device. A lot of UI elements take up a fixed amount of space that may look fine on a larger screen, but on a phone or ~7" tablet, they become visibly unusable (at least from a practical standpoint if not a literal one).

I concur, fixed dimension elements would be a problem on a smaller screen. However, I think the answer to those is to have the CSS specify responsive positioning, so that the browser can reflow elements as needed to make things fit. My concern with the original request is that I read it as a request for a parallel site, designed specifically for mobile, and stripped/modified as needed for that sole purpose. In my opinion, mobile browsers ought to be able to consume the same site as desktop browsers, aside from the concern you raised about fixed dimension elements that require extensive scrolling.

As I understand CSS and responsive design, it's possible, although sadly not nearly popular enough, to write the CSS such that users with laptop-or-bigger display area get full use of their screen, and users on tiny mobile screens get something that works as well as can be expected - and all without needing special Javascript to generate the pages dynamically.

However, I have no idea how mobile users expect to be able to interact with code tags, even if they have the awful embedded horizontal scrolling window.

I expect most mobile users won't be able to post the diagnostics we typically request, but they might be able to read the forum well enough to receive posted advice and apply it to try to repair a distressed Gentoo system.

I can't imagine the requests for help from such limited devices (though I think I have seen some), and I can't imagine how challenging it would be to try helping someone from a mobile device.

Agreed, it generally wouldn't work well. However, for respondents, it might be sufficient when the response can be to post a link to a page which describes the problem/solution in more detail, particularly when the user is requesting help with a known and previously reported bug. Similarly, given how often users fail to post standard files, such as the build.log, respondents might find it feasible to use a mobile device to remind the user to follow Portage's instructions, so that by the time the respondent has access to a laptop/desktop to do more research and extended composition, the requester will have posted the information necessary to direct that research. (The alternative is that the respondent waits until laptop access just to remind the user to follow instructions, then has to wait hours or days more for the user to follow through, after which the respondent will finally have enough information to compose a meaningful response.)

[pjp]

My concern with the original request is that I read it as a request for a parallel site, designed specifically for mobile, and stripped/modified as needed for that sole purpose.

Now that I re-read it, that does seem to be possible, but I've never heard of different sites. My brain just read it as another request for mobile support. Perhaps they meant something along the lines of "en.m.wikipedia" and the standard version.

In my opinion, mobile browsers ought to be able to consume the same site as desktop browsers, aside from the concern you raised about fixed dimension elements that require extensive scrolling.

If you mean using responsive design that you referenced, then I don't think there's much reason they couldn't. But that would require someone creating a responsive design for phpbb2, or we wait :)

As I understand CSS and responsive design, it's possible, although sadly not nearly popular enough, to write the CSS such that users with laptop-or-bigger display area get full use of their screen, and users on tiny mobile screens get something that works as well as can be expected - and all without needing special Javascript to generate the pages dynamically.

In so much as web design is flexible across platforms, browsers and device sizes, it is possible. But Oh My God. If that phrase is ever appropriate, it is very much so with web design. And I'm only referring to the non-controversial parts, excluding even the vi vs. emacs aspects.

I'm not opposed to mobile support, and I agree that it could be helpful for basics, but that seems a minimal degree of benefit compared with the expressed desire for the support.

And while I'd consider enabling js for f.g.o, I can't think of a useful feature it would add. I actively do not want instantaneous updates of PMs, new posts or user presence, and I would not use a continuous scrolling presentation. While some of those features may be great helping to maintain user engagement, I find them to be a horrible UI/UX.

[Chiitoo]

The "responsiveness" indeed comes from CSS for phpBB-3, usually, and as far as I remember, it will work just fine with JavaScript disabled.

Additionally, I put a somewhat considerable amount of time making a theme that will be similar to the current one, and unlike most phpBB 3 themes, uses the whole width of the browser.

We can have additional themes for those who want a "modern" borin^Wflat look instead, and at least one what will look more like gentoo.org and the wiki... when the infra issues with the upgrade get sorted and we'll actually move to phpBB-3.

[steve_v]

it will work just fine with JavaScript disabled...
unlike most phpBB 3 themes, uses the whole width of the browser.

Sounds awesome.

[Hund]

Would you accept a modified version of your theme with support for responsive design?

It doesn't even have to be set as the default theme. Users who wants responsive design can activate it themselves for their profile only.