You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Please be patient: this is a large open source project that is overseen by a mixture of volunteers and non-volunteers which are all ultimately busy.
If your suggestion is a troubleshooting scenario or one you're not 100% certain about, please post for feedback on the Nextcloud Help Forum first.
Then return here to bring back your experience to help improve the documentation for clarity, etc. (and link back to the forum discussion in your report!)
Protip: If you want to help move things along (or just help out in other ways too) here are some suggestions:
Look for areas where you can assist - even seemingly unrelated areas - because doing so frees up resources for your favorite topics and ideas.
Submit a proposed change - that attempts to addresses your issue - as a pull request.
Participate in a discussion on some other unresolved submitted idea ("issues") to help move it along.
For menu elements, it can make sense that the size does not increase to much (e.g. having 172512 new elements). In the end it depends what and where it is, just randomly choose 1000 as limit for everything. I experienced the same thing in different software, where they did a similar thing and I had a counter between 1200 and 1800, and it was really painful to see 999+ all the time. In contrast to Nextcloud it wasn't open source, so I couldn't even change it for myself 😡
Would this be an option: Do it like file sizes, e.g. 1.7k+ for more than 1700 but less than 1800, it is shorter but contains a bit more information than just 999+?
Thanks for helping improve our documentation!
Per nextcloud/tasks#2416 (comment), I believe that https://docs.nextcloud.com/server/latest/developer_manual/html_css_design/navigation.html#counter:~:text=the%20counter%20should%20be%20limited%20to%20999%20and%20turn%20to%20999%2B%20if%20any%20higher%20number%20is%20given should be reconsidered. I see no reason for counts to be limited to 999, especially because every time I encounter that value, it's exactly when I care about the count of what I'm looking at (because it's usually notably large and thus usefully quantified).
Notes
Protip: If you want to help move things along (or just help out in other ways too) here are some suggestions:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: