1. It looks like the template forced the Non-Sequitur into the same box as Rubes, resulting in an illegible resolution (if you open the image in a new tab, it shows up in normal size).
    P.S. I still think the notes should go before, rather than after the comics (especially when there are more than one), but Bill already said that this wasn’t as easy to accomplish with WordPress.

  2. I agree before would be better, although it did throw me off the few times it was done (because I was so used to the way Bill did it).

  3. @Kilby + @Powers : We’ve been trying, to some extent, to put the comments above. There is no technical difficulty. But you may not be anticipating the actual oddities we’ve been encountering in practice, having to do with phrasing and pacing and relevance. Not every kind of editorial comment is suitable for placement above — think in terms of spoilers. Or less decisively, still a reference better understood after the image itself. (Saying “terminating with a colon solves all your problems” is not accurate.)

    Then, once you have one which really needs to go below, it forces one’s hand on the others — you don’t want to end up with a parity error.

  4. It looks like the template forced the Non-Sequitur into the same box as Rubes, resulting in an illegible resolution

    I’m sorry it isn’t coming thru right for you. What platform is that?

    There’s no template involved, really; nor the theme either, to use the WordPress term for what I think your “template” is meant to cover.

    Winter was just trying out another variety of Block, within the Block-based editor tool. This is the side-by-side image pair. We can’t find out what works and what doesn’t, and might be interesting or helpful, without trying them out. (Oddly, the block editor will offer to pick up some combination of blocks and current content, and “save as template” — so indeed we might one day have template problems.)

    Of course we do preview and check. This image-pair block previewed fine, as far as we could see. The previewer gives three views: Desktop, Tablet, and Phone. These came out fine and side-by-side in Desktop and Tablet, and reverted to vertical sequence for Phone. Of course this isn’t really going into depth of variations like actual screen size and choice of browser, etc. Which is why this specific feedback is useful.

  5. The non-sequitor is also small for me on a desktop using Chrome or Firefox. I only see 3 comics, and I’m wondering if there really are 4, or is Dana gaslighting us?

  6. The non-sequitor is also small for me on a desktop using Chrome or Firefox. I only see 3 comics, and I’m wondering if there really are 4, or is Dana gaslighting us? And when I tried to comment using the one I don’t usually use, it went into moderation.

  7. Never mind; I somehow missed the first two side-by-side comics were two comics. Uggh. Maybe I should take up drinking coffee if this is my morning brain!

  8. @ Mitch4 – I’ve tested it on the following platforms: Mac OSX (Safari & Firefox), Win-10 (Firefox, Chrome, Edge), iPad (Safari), & iPhone (Safari & Firefox). In every single case except for one(†), the “default” display is exactly the same: Argyle Sweater and Speed bump are side-by-side in a row, and Rubes and Non-Sequitur are in a column. In all five of the desktop browsers, narrowing the window eventually causes the first two panels to “stack” into a column, but widening the window doesn’t do anything for “Non Sequitur”, it remains below and telescoped to the width of “Rubes”, no matter which system is used. (I’ve sent a screenshot to the “submissions” address.)
    All of the blocks appear to be limiting the display size of the images. If you view any of the images (not just Non Sequitur) in a new tab, it will appear significantly larger than it does on the CIDU page.
    P.S. † – The one exception is the iPhone held in “portrait” orientation, which narrows the frame so that the “stacked” arrangement is the default (both for Safari and Firefox). However, if I hold the phone in “landscape”, those two unstack to the same arrangement as everywhere else (Rubes and Non-Sequitur remain glued together). Oddly enough, the iPad Safari doesn’t stack the images in either orientation.
    P.P.S. The advantage with mobile devices is that it is easier to zoom in on the reduced images, but I cannot tell whether it makes a difference when zooming in on a reduced size version of the image.

  9. I would suggest that if there are more than 1 comic in a post, they be separated with a horizontal line (in good ol’d html, this would be an hr tag), maybe 50% width, preferably centered, but possibly left flush; that way, there would be a nice visual grouping, and any comments, either before or after the comic, would clearly visually belong to that comic.

  10. P.P.P.S. I don’t understand why either of the notes above would have been a “spoiler” when placed above the comics. My primary problem was that the comment crediting Andréa is actually aligned closer to the Rubes below it than to the pair above. My first impression was that she had expanded the synchronicity to form a trifecta. It wasn’t until I saw the last line and examined the dates that I was sure which ones she had submitted.

  11. P.P.P.P.S. @ larK – That might work, although it may produce odd effects with the new “block” editor. Just for fun, I’m going to place a pair of “<hr>” tags at the end of this comment.

    (I sincerely doubt that WordPress will preserve them.)

  12. One of the incidental features — no, it may be more important than that — of the Block Editor is that it has a couple easy ways of moving blocks. There is a “grab and slide” touchpoint, and a paired set of up and down indicators, much like the ones Horace Horse finds himself dealing with.

    The upshot for the discussion in this thread is that it makes it easier to try out placement of a comment above or below the comic it goes with. If the comment is in a paragraph block and the comic is in an image block, the two can be reordered as blocks, without delicate selection and cut/paste in the Classic Editor. Not that we’re incapable of that kind of careful cut/paste operation, but there is the brute fact that something is easier to decide to do if you know doing it is going to be easier too.

    One of the downsides of having comment and image in separate blocks may be the vertical spacing mentioned here. It treats the paragraph block as just another block in the page sequence, no more strongly attached to the image block above than to the image block below.

    BTW, the image block has fields or features we have not generally been using, except in tryout or by accident. (One is Alt Text, which we really should be using.) One is a Caption field, and it does produce text more closely associated with the image in the block. But we tried it and there were reasons against it. The text is below the image, fine, but centered, and in I forget what stylized face. These might be adjustable, but at the moment I don’t see it as the cure to keep comment associated with picture.

  13. mitch4: Unless I’m missing something, you and Kilby are talking about different pairs of comics. I think he’s complaining about the second two comics, not the first two side-by-side comics.

    There was no template issue with the second pair of comics, I just scaled them to an unusually small size (IIRC, I was trying to get them side-by-side, and when I gave up on that, I forgot to make them a normal size). I’ve resized them now: Kilby, is it readable now.

    Yep, no technical or spoiler issue in this case with putting the comments above the comics. But in general, most discussion makes sense after the comic, and I think it makes sense to be consistent between posts (all editorial comments below, or all editorial comments above, including attribution comments).

  14. There is a Dynamic Separator block type. I’ll toss a few in tomorrow’s collection and you’all can see what style you like. (However, there are hardly any comments to make the idea really worthwhile in this case.)

  15. The first pair are still unusually small, to keep them side-by-side (unless you’re on a phone).

  16. chemgal: “Maybe I should take up drinking coffee if this is my morning brain!”

    I know you’re just joking, but I’ve read that in the long run, drinking coffee doesn’t help with alertness. If helps you wake up for the first few months, and then once your body adjusts to it, you need to drink coffee in the morning to be as alert as you were before without coffee.

  17. Interesting — Opera desktop on Windows, all four images clear and large enough, top pair lined up nicely and even have the right small margin between, to keep them separate.

    Switching to WP Reader mode, there is a vertical stack of four separate ones. The Wiley is much larger, but that may be because WW adjusted it in the interim?

    I’m not really entertained by any of them, no offense. Was there a hydrant reference in the second dog one?

  18. WW, yeah, I don’t think I could ever get to like the taste of coffee, so it’s just as well I know it doesn’t work in the long run. It smells great, though.

  19. The first two comics are side-by-side and rather small for me too, but it’s not that difficult to work out what’s going on. Hardly worth mentioning, really.

    I would like to second Boise Ed’s sentiment. Standing ovation, in fact.

  20. Count me in for another “Ditto!” to Boise Ed’s commendation. Even though I still grieve over the untimely loss of CIDU Bill, the new team of Editors is doing a fantastic job at keeping this website running, both in a social as well as technical sense. Actually, to be brutally honest, Bill was an excellent diplomat, but his relationship with technology was slightly rocky: he usually stuck with whatever single solution that worked, and had only limited patience for experimentation. It’s nice to see that it is indeed possible to change several things that Bill had held for “immutable” (such as the left-side menu).
    P.S. Just to confirm what WW said, the problem I raised @1 had nothing to do with the floating blocks (or reduced resolution) for the two first panels, I was only objecting to squeezing the “Non-Sequitur” into the same block as Rubes. Winter’s adjustment is a definite improvement, and there is absolutely no reason to fiddle with any of this again, but I would suggest that the best (initial) solution would have been to place those two comics in separate blocks (like the first two), thus allowing the second (strip) to go to full width, without needing to expand the first (panel).
    P.P.S. I have since discovered that the CIDU RSS “Posts” feed displays all four comics at full resolution, even though it retains the same block positions (and the stacking feature).

  21. Another big thank you to our new editors, you’re doing a great job. As for the comment about Bill’s technical acumen, take it from someone who spent a quarter century working in the black arts, Bill had the right idea. One can waste a couple of days trying to get a perfectly good (as in – it works just fine) program to display exactly the way you want it, instead of “close enough for jazz.” I was slightly compulsive about my work, and I went down that rabbit hole more times than I’d like to admit.


    Oh, and how about a thin blue line that extends all the way across?

  22. @ Dave – Nice to see that you have condensed back into place.
    P.S. There are still a number of other familiar names that I am hoping will return to take active part in CIDU discussions. Perhaps they are just lurking about: I just hope they haven’t left entirely.

Add a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.