Ideas?

sorry cant comment on that one, thats a whole foreign language to me!! Didnt understand a word of it lol!

Without JavaScript, any change to a page (e.g. to vote on something) requires reloading the entire thing. This is slow and confusing (the whole page jumps around). The interface can be effectively unusable. However, some elements don't really need JavaScript. The commenting box is hidden to reduce clutter, but it could be handled in a different way so that it would remain visible with JavaScript turned off. Let me know if there are other problems you are having with JavaScript disabled, and I'll attend to them.

Here's a thought. One of the things I like most about this site is its spacial awareness. When you are viewing a hut/photo/track etc the site shows you other nearby objects and you can also click on larger map to see the object you are viewing on the map, but this doesn't show the other nearby objects. The map in home/NZ Map does all that. Would it be possible to have a button on each object that launches NZ Map with the current object open. That means when I see another hut is nearby I can immediately open a map which shows me where it is in relation to the one I am looking at.

Yes! I should have done that ages ago!

Hi, You should now be able to comment without JavaScript.

I merged the two versions of Army Hut, and had a play unmerging them and merging again. Seems reasonably easy to use, if you read the instructions at the top of the page telling you to copy the info first (which I didn't). As expected the retained version of the hut shows up in search results and the megred one does not. My only concern is there is then no way for a user to find the old (removed) version after it's been merged & removed. It's still there if you know the page number, and if you manually navigate to it by typing it in the address bar or bookmarking it you can view it and unmerge it. This means the lost information is not viewable after the event by anybody. Normal changes to any item can be checked by viewing the revision history, and undone if they are undesiable. But there is no user-based way of checking what has been lost in a merge, unless you know the old item number. My suggestion would be a note of some sort on the _retained_ item's page stating that it has been merged _from_ the removed version. This would have to show the item number at the least to allow the user to navigate to the lost information, view it and unmerge if necessary. A dummy entry in the revision history of the _retained_ item, similar to that in the _removed_ item, with a comment 'Merged from "name" (#1234)' would be one way of doing this.

Madpom: good point. I will sort that out. The approach you suggest is probably the right one.

Hi Matt Liking the wider pages! Any chance with the new forum thread layout that when you click into the topic, that it automatically brings up the most recent posts first rather than the oldest ones? I see there is a tab to then click 'view latest post' but it feels more logical to have the recent posts viewed first and the older ones go chronologically backwards from there?

I too like the new page layout for the forums, nice work Matthew!!! One suggestion is that when on the home page and you click on the latest post from a particular forum (in the forums box), you go to the last page (which obviously would include the latest post) instead of the first page. Otherwise I personally like having the oldest posts first, it makes following the discussion easier to follow. I frequent another forum that has newest post first, and it's painful following a thread when having to read from the bottom of the page upwards.

Lisa, there seems to be a debate on what is "preferable" on that one. How it is now is also the standard way for forums. Open to debate. NZBazza, yes I noticed that. It's been fixed, not rolled out yet. Also, when you submit a post, it should go to the last page (where your post is). That's also been fixed but not rolled out yet. Lisa, once those issues above are rolled out, it might seem more logical as is. We'll see....