Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="bribbon" data-source="post: 1037176" data-attributes="member: 82463">Thank you offbyone that you participate in the discussion. You have one of the best extension for media portal created.This Summary goes in the right direction.Here is a post in which is a lot about the quality of the logos claims: <a href="https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/threads/logomanager-0-0-0-1.119376/page-29#post-1026024" target="_blank">click me</a>.I think it is sufficient if the main points of it are shown at the upload side. An audit by the webserver itself - which determines the upload quality - is because of the mandatory release by an admin not absolutely necessary. Rough tests as the maximum file size or file format, definitely makes more sense.The most important of the upload function itself is that one learns as admin, that there are new station logos (no more monitoring). To replace a logo from a bad upload takes little time.. and guarantees a high quality standard.That would be an solution.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="bribbon, post: 1037176, member: 82463"] Thank you offbyone that you participate in the discussion. You have one of the best extension for media portal created. This Summary goes in the right direction. Here is a post in which is a lot about the quality of the logos claims: [URL='https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/threads/logomanager-0-0-0-1.119376/page-29#post-1026024']click me[/URL]. I think it is sufficient if the main points of it are shown at the upload side. An audit by the webserver itself - which determines the upload quality - is because of the mandatory release by an admin not absolutely necessary. Rough tests as the maximum file size or file format, definitely makes more sense. The most important of the upload function itself is that one learns as admin, that there are new station logos (no more monitoring). To replace a logo from a bad upload takes little time.. and guarantees a high quality standard. That would be an solution. [/QUOTE]

Verification