Will the programmers consider supporting sub albums? I know the reason is to keep things simple, but I am in a situation here. I take lots of photos of fashion shows, and would like to sort them out according to years, which fashion shows, and designers... example
2006 > Spring Summer > London Fashion Week > Stella McCartney
It's not really feasable at this point. The whole system is built on the collection/album/picture paradigm, and changing it at this point would require a significant rewrite to almost every module in the system.
If you are set on Plogger, I would suggest that you think of ways to simplify your categorization. You'd be surprised at the level of depth you can achieve with only a two level hierarchy.
For example, you could create a collection called "Fashion Shows", and inside that collection you would have the "London Fashion Week" album. You could then create a collection called "Fashion Designers" and include an album called "Stella McCartney". There may be overlap here, images that are from London Fashion Week and Stella McCartney would be found in both albums. You can drop the year collection in my opinion and just add it as a prefix to other collections like "2006 London Fashion Week".
Anyway, maybe by thinking about this in a different way Plogger can become a viable solution for you.
We need to re-evaluate a lot of things in Plogger, including the album system. But it all takes time, energy and effort, a huge amount of which folks like Mike and Anti have invested already.
I *personally* foresee a Plogger with potentially unlimited depth album system, with an access-level user system, written with OOP in PHP5. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
However, this means almost a complete re-write, yet again, so I wouldn't advise anybody to hold their breath.
I agree and don't agree with you Derek. Eventually there will be unlimited sub-albums, but I wouldn't use it. I have used galleries both as creater/owner and/or visiter, and I found too much levels very very confusing. For myself because one tends to create too many levels, just because it's possible. And being rather neurotic about this I always wanted to make such a system perfect so I kept rearranging all the photos. And it was a waste of time.
As a visitor I'm also confused by too many levels. Where was I? In which subsubsubsubsub album did I see that little red bike? Before you know it you're just clicking around all the albums and get totally lost. Structure is necessary, but like with governments, too many departments make it all very slow and obscure.
I chose for Plogger because it is easy to use, very elegant, lightweight, very customisable and very complete as it is. Perhaps you should consider a complete rewrite when you are all retired? =)
Jack I'm totally with you on that one. Even in my OS start menu, I find that if I have a shortcut that is buried more than two levels deep, I will never find it. To me, two levels is optimal, it keeps simplicity while still allowing a nice way to keep things organized and categorized. I hope to see it stay this way.
Though it may be surprising, I agree with Jack and MIke. It is confusing. ;)
I see it as the decision of the site admin, however. Ultimately, an album object (yay, PHP5) shouldn't care if it contains albums, photos or both. LIke a filesystem... is it a file or folder? You know by the look (folder icon vs file icon), but the view and interface treats it the same. Ideally, that's what I'd like to see for Plogger. But, as I (hopefully) said above, it depends on where all the dev team wants to see it go.
I am on the side of sub-albums (or whatever we call them). A third level would make it a lot more useable for me. I will soon have many dozens of albums under a category making for a user interface issue. But otherwise, love it so far.
There is a Trac ticket started for this, but I don't know how long it will take to implement it. It will be a large rewrite for the codebase, so it will take awhile to get everything worked out.