yet another "powered by" question... taget="_blank"

[CLarkin]

Hi all,

(Since this is my first post) First of all thanks to the dev team for a superb script, I wont go on about how many second rate gallery scripts I have tried in the last week...

Anyway, my Q - now I have done the search here, I'm aware of everyone's stance. I also agree with it and fully support it. I have even written a page on my site to introduce new computer users to the wonders of Open Source, and will be adding Coppermine Gallery to it...

I would like to make one tiny change to the "powered by" line... I want to remove the taget="_blank" from the anchor.

The reason for this is because Im desiging a template that will be XHTML 1.0 Strict (target='' won't validate), Im also ripping out all the tables, and using CSS for layout. I've done this with the rest of my site and want my gallery to fit in seamlessly. (www.puffandlarkin.com/family/)

Now, understanding the dev teams stand point on this issue, I realise no-one will want to post a solution here, so - if my request is acceptable, could someone PM me or send an e-mail to me - colin@puffandlarkin.com

I hope this is seen as a reasonable request, If its prefered not to send 'instructions', so to speak, I wouldnt mind if it you decided to send a modified file (or files) to overwrite existing ones, I just wanna lose the target="_blank" - NOTHING ELSE!

Cheers

~CL

[CLarkin]

...actually, Ive just added my own deafault Style Sheet to to the template, and the forst this it did was completely hide the important line (due to a similar class name) - definitely not what I wanted to do!

[Joachim Müller]

hrm, I'm sorry, I won't tell you how to do this, but I'm considering removing all references of target="_blank" within the coppermine code in the next version. I'll bring this issue up on the dev team.

Joachim

[CLarkin]

  I didnt expect you to! thanks for the attention anyway.. and I wouldnt object to you sending me an early beta with that change in it

[Joachim Müller]

you're free to check out the devel branch of the cvs anonymously at any time, but you have to understand that devel versions are not meant for production sites.

Joachim

[CLarkin]

Thanks Joachim, Ive managed a butchers method for removing the line altogether, now I just have to write it back in double size   (hope I didnt do too much damage  :-\\)

[CLarkin]

well Ive finally managed to trace it and then another couple of hours to get it working, Im sure this doesnt make me a hacker since its supposed to be open, but I have to question if this is really 'open'.
Im sure it is technically, but I still have my reservations...

I suppose Im just a little peeved at the moment, since it has taken so much time off me - for such a tiny little issue (then again a drop in the ocean compared to the hours you guys have put in)

Anyway, Im sure you all have had this discussion more than once.

Thanks again ~DorfDorf

[Joachim Müller]

like I said: we're considering to remove the target attribute completely from the code. There will be only one version (having two versions would present an easy means for anyone who could use a diff viewer). As you found out how the link can be changed for yourself, I suggest you leave things as it is. As the faq clearly state, we won't answer questions on this issue at all.

Joachim

[skybax]

@GauGau  could we use Sitepoint's article: New-Window Links in a Standards-Compliant World to solve the problem?

[Joachim Müller]

Hm, although we could use the attribut rel="external", I'm voting for a plain link that will open in the same or a new window, up to the user's decision. I hate it when pages open new windows without my approval, and I think others don't like it as well. Everybody knows how to pen links in new windows after all. But this place is wrong for this discussion, this thread already draws more attention than it actually deserves. Let's continue this discussion on the dev board. Locking this thread now.

Joachim