|
For the example of this glitch, please see the list of my articles:
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/SAKryukov#articles[^].
The list is classified into sections and sub-sections. Please look at the first section, "Audio and Video".
Only the very first article, "Practical Sound Recorder with Sound Activation" is classified correctly. All other article under the "Audio and Video" have nothing to do with audio or video; they are written on fundamental topics and could be classified into the available section ".NET platform".
To work around the problem, I tried to reclassify only one of those incorrectly classified articles, "Wish You Were Here… Only Once". And now I can really see the glitch: 1) this article is actually classified into section/subsection correctly, as ".NET Framework"/"General"; but it is still shown as "Audio and Video" on the page referenced above; 2) I tried to publish it again without any changes; the date was modified to today's date, but the problem with the list of article wasn't fixed.
Thank you.
—SASergey A Kryukov
modified 5-Sep-14 10:16am.
|
|
|
|
|
On that page I see a single article under Audio and Video and a whole bunch under ".NET Framework"
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your reply, Chris.
It would be good to see it this way.
However, even if I look at it through "View page source", I cannot find the string ".NET Framework" in the whole HTML text.
This looks puzzling…
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov wrote: I'm using Mozilla Seamonkey 2.26.1 at the moment
If it's not too much trouble could you try another browser?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
No trouble at all; will do a bit later.
Thank you.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
I see it in Firefox 31.0, as well as in SeaMonkey 2.26.1 (Portable, but that shouldn't make a difference)
So I cannot reproduce this.
@SAKryukov, what extensions do you have installed?
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
---
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much for the idea.
You not gonna believe that: at this moment, no extension. To test it, I disabled all the extensions and deactivated all plug-ins, terminated the browsers, loaded again, reloaded the page. Same thing: everything is as expected, only the element with the text ".NET Framework" is completely missing, even from the HTML source. The weirdest thing, I must say.
I'll try other browsers soon.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Did you try clearing the cache/cookies/etc? And what server(s) do you see this on (I would guess all of them)?
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
---
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for this suggestion, I'll try now. Cache should not interfere because I explicitly reload the page (such pages should be not cached), not so sure about the cookies.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Yes! Thank you again for the suggestion. The problem is the cookie.
Here is what happens: if I set the "block cookies from this Web site" option and reload the page, the element showing ".NET Frameworks" appears on it; the whole page looks correctly.
If I set cookie options to default, cookie handling is back, and this line disappears.
Now, the question is, what's so wrong with some cookie, if it just affects this line. I am not 100% is the rest of the content is the same, will check up.
Thank you very much.
—SA
Sergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Probably some cached cookie got corrupted and is messing with the browser. That has happened to me before (Firefox [Happens randomly, sometimes fixes itself], Chrome [Almost every freaking day!], IE [The least number of times!], and SeaMonkey [Only once, but I only used the browser once!])
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
---
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, I understand it. I can see about 25 cookies, don't want to remove any at this moment. Just in case, I wrote a comment on that to Chris, entitled "To look at a COOKIE"; please see below.
Thank you very much for giving me this idea.
Cheers,
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Chris,
Brisingr Aerowing gave me the right idea: it turned out that the problem is apparently related to some cookie.
I described my test below in my discussion with him above, under the title "Cookie at fault!": temporary blocking the cookies shows the missing ".NET Framework" element, and unblocking it hides this line again.
At this moment, I don't want to permanently remove any cookies, because — what if it could serve as a useful information for you to address the problem? If the problem as in the past, it would be fine, but I think it would be useful to pinpoint it.
I got about 25 cookies from CodeProject. If you are interested, I'll send you the list with all properties of each one? Or would you want me to look at something in particular? Then I would send you just the names at first…
Thank you.
—SA
Sergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Sending them would be hugely helpful. At the very least I'll resurrect the code we used to have to explicitly clean up your cookies so we don't pollute your browser so much.
My eaail: chris@codeproject.com
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Great, I'll do it. Give me some time (I'm on vacation now).
No, polluting the browser data on the my particular systems won't be a problem at all; I'll always be able to clean it up. It will be more important to prevent future pollution of other systems and confusing the users through it.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Chris,
Below, I collected all the cookies from the the domains: codeproject.com, workspaces.codeproject.com (probably irrelevant) and www.codeproject.com.
This data is shown in 3 sections delimited by "[domain...]: ==========================..." lines.
I put the properties of each cookie in the following format:
1st line: name
2nd line: content ("[empty context]" for the cookie named "__utmv" means empty, not the line "[empty context]"  )
3rd line: a type of connection the cookie is send for, expiration information
Please tell me if you need data on some domains other than *codeproject.com. I won't remove these cookies for a while, in case you have any need for additional information. See the list below.
Thank you.
—SA
codeproject.com: =================================================================
__qca
P0-2089622284-1362284948250
Any type of connection, Monday, September 01, 2014 21:12:17
_jsuid
492952328
Any type of connection, Monday, August 15, 2033 23:51:34
DmGlobalUserId
140779
Any type of connection, Wednesday, April 16, 2064 00:11:27
DmGlobalUserIdCookieConfirmed
OK
Any type of connection, Wednesday, April 16, 2064 00:11:27
_ga
GA1.2.1922427134.1353035455
Any type of connection, Friday, May 27, 2016 00:53:08
dmaduid
n6Hm7RiWdB16/crFl8V5ZA==
Any type of connection, Friday, June 06, 2064 00:01:59
dmaduid_confirm
OK
Any type of connection, Friday, June 06, 2064 00:01:59
__utmv
[empty context]
Any type of connection, Sunday, August 31, 2014 13:32:08
__gads
ID=a248ce875ef75ea1:T=1409765215:S=ALNI_Mbv05ChIMNUv2EQ65N84089zm6tyw
Any type of connection, Friday, September 02, 2016 13:26:55
cntid
225
Any type of connection, Thursday, March 05, 2015 00:00:06
idtag
-%3c%0c%06ZR%c2%a6%c3%98s%10%c3%95%c3%85_8g%0d%c3%98%c2%a8%c3%88%27G%c3%ad%c3%87%0a%e2%80%98
Any type of connection, Monday, September 05, 2039 00:00:06
loginkey
-608912512
Any type of connection, Monday, September 05, 2039 00:00:06
cat0
3
Any type of connection, Thursday, September 05, 2024 00:00:06
__utma
40492976.1922427134.1353035455.1409935371.1409967467.2965
Any type of connection, Sunday, September 04, 2016 21:47:42
__utmb
40492976.5.10.1409967467
Any type of connection
Friday, September 05, 2014 22:17:42
__utmc
40492976
Any type of connection, At end of session
__utmz
40492976.1409769749.2953.136.utmcsr=google|utmccn=(organic)|utmcmd=organic|utmctr=(not%20provided)
Any type of connection, Saturday, March 07, 2015 08:47:42
mguid
42a7d533-9829-4f88-8fc6-84dc936250c9
Any type of connection, Monday, September 05, 2039 00:00:06
workspaces.codeproject.com: ======================================================
user_info
%257B%2522uid%2522%3A%2522user.52f991b54a43234172000091%2522%2C%2522global_id%2522%3A%25222289209%2522%2C%2522slug%2522%3A%2522sakryukov%2522%2C%2522name%2522%3A%2522Sergey%2520Alexandrovich%2520Kryukov%2522%2C%2522email%2522%3A%2522codeproject%40sakryukov.org%2522%2C%2522flags%2522%3A%5B%5D%2C%2522session_token%2522%3A%2522e51bd351201ccee58cf5c38a2c4a7303e39df6d8f227f1d442f9d5232f8fe78e89e933c7db588ad4bb93438d6367ad6c%2522%257D
Any type of connection, Tuesday, September 01, 2015 01:59:27
_workspaces_ui_session
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--ff44b710af9ab63fb8fe734263a8b73d0528ef43
Any type of connection, no script access, Tuesday, September 01, 2015 01:59:27
www.codeproject.com: =============================================================
__utma
40492976.1922427134.1353035455.1379940830.1379996549.1318
Any type of connection, Thursday, September 24, 2015 00:48:07
LoungeTab
2
Any type of connection, Saturday, February 25, 2017 13:45:17
Sergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Chris,
I found that some CodeProject cookie is also responsible for another issue I reported before.
I answer the question, then I can see the answer on the question page, but reloading of the page of the list of questions still shows the answer as unanswered.
I used the same idea. This time, I tried to disable cookies from CodeProject and then update the question list page. In this case, the list page is shown correctly. After this step (assuming that the state of the questions/answers is not modified during this time), it's possible to enable cookies again; and then reloading the page still shows it correctly.
I think, that said, the problem cannot be attributed to old broken cookies, it is the problem of the freshly created cookie. Indeed, blocking the cookies does not prevent creations or update of the cookies. The fresh cookie is created correctly, because some previously existing cookie was blocked, but it it isn't blocked, the cookie is not correctly created or updated, which can be attributed to some bug, in, say, interpreting of the existing cookie. Isn't it logical?
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Every so often we get "who approved this PoS?" style questions recently
For example[^]
+ lots in the moderators forum...
is there any mileage in showing which members approved a particular article? Given some of the guff that gets through, it looks like people are approving their mate's articles.
Quid custodiet ipsos custodes?
Alberto Brandolini: The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you mean - Qui custodiet ipsos custodes?
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm from here.[^]
Frankly I'm doing well to know the Romans existed.
My dad used to teach the kiddiewinks at the proto-borstal he used to teach at that the Romans and Greek used to fight over this[^]. Not one spotted the problem.
Alberto Brandolini: The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.
|
|
|
|
|
Keith Barrow wrote: Quid custodiet ipsos custodes?
I think that should be:
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes
|
|
|
|
|
Keith Barrow wrote: Quid custodiet ipsos custodes?
Custard covered custard for a pound?
|
|
|
|
|
We have a winner!
Alberto Brandolini: The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
