|
Why does the article/tip submission wizard litter my articles with artificial paragraph tags. It really screws up my layout. (And yes, I'm checking the "Leave my HTML alone" checkbox.)
While I'm here, it also refuses to correctly interpret pointy brackets in pre blocks, even though the language is correctly identified in the tags.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Can you please send me the raw HTML you want to put in the editor and then let me know where you're seeing redundant p's. If I can't fix it I may at least be able to offer an explanation (or even a post-processing button to clean it up).
Also an example of the pointy brackets.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
When I submit an article, I don't put in extraneous tags. After I submit it, if I go back to edit it, I find numerous instances of this:
<p>& nbsp;</p> (ignore the space, I didn't know how to show the nbsp; thing otherwise)
I did not put those in. If I go back through and delete them, and then go back and edit the article again, they're back. I also don't like the ascii replacements for quotes. It just clutters up the markup (but I kinda understand why you might want to do that).
In any case, the paragraph tags cause unwanted double/triple spacing and just basically craps up my articles. That's my main complaint.
And BTW, I always edit my articles in source mode so I can see the html.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
use & to show the HTML entity for an "&".
Which article? If you clean out the empty paragraph tags and then go back, does it add them back?
(and which browser? Please no IE7. Please...)
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. That's exactly what happens. When I save it, they're put back in.
This is the article in question. Documenting SQL Stored Procs in C# Code[^]
Using IE 11.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
I've just edited it in Chrome and in IE11 and I can't replicate your issue in either.
I'm stumped.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Well, whatever you did fixed that article. Thanks.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
I added a solution to a QA convert vba into c program to call a dll function[^] including some code. The first two lines of code should look like:
char *p1, *p2, *p3;
p1 = (char*)malloc(255);
but the asterisk in front of p3 has been taken as the start of italic font, so it actually shows as:
char *p1, *p2, p3;
p1 = (char)malloc(255);
|
|
|
|
|
Looks good now, but the trick is you escape the * with a \
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
But now it shows the backslash. Shouldn't markdown be totally disabled inside <pre> blocks?
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to Markdown. We specialise in making your subtle formatting a nightmare.
I'm working on my own Markdown processor to handle exactly this kind of issue. Yes - another wheel for the world. Maybe I patent it.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: Shouldn't markdown be totally disabled inside <pre> blocks?
Yes, I agree!!!
If I use a <pre> block, then don't add additional markdown processing!
"Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children the dragons can be killed."
- G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
|
|
Could you please delete my account? I only made it to download one file. I don't need it anymore. Delete it from your database please - I will be most thankful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
When writing an answer, highlight is partially supported, if the answer is improved, it is not supported at all.
<pre lang="cs">
int <span class="highlight">myVar</span> = 0;
</pre>
This don't work in QA as the result is:
int myVar
The = 0; at the end is missing.
And if you improve the answer, it get encoded
Look at Article writing: How to change the background color in code block[^] Solution 2
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
modified 3-Oct-15 15:05pm.
|
|
|
|
|
This has now been fixed. I'll deploy the new code later tonight.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
0x01AA's little problem below gave me a thought: moderation appears to confuse some people and they post exactly the same message again immediately because they assume it's lost.
And at the moment, to avoid an unfair "spammer" hit on the poster you have to let it through, then clean up afterwards when it finally gets displayed - which can take a while if the DB farm doesn't synch quickly enough.
So how about an extra button in spam moderation: "Spam", "Not spam", and "Duplicate" - the latter removes the "spare copy" but doesn't tag anything or anyone as a spammer?
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: 0x01AA's little problem
For me it is/was a question to be suspended one more time.
Bruno
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Wouldn't it make more sense to display the message to the user who posted it, but not to anyone else until it's been released from the queue? (Possibly with a hint to indicate that it's in the moderation queue.)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
The problem with that is that unless the OP types it in exactly the same the second time (punctuation, case, spelling, and precise word usage) it's not going to be identical, so it's difficult for machines to spot.
Humans do a much better job of that kind of comparison, particularly if there are two copies in the moderation queue together! 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but if you display the message to the user as if it had actually been posted, possibly with a "this message is in the moderation queue" notification, then they'll be less likely to post it again. 
For most users, it's only when their message disappears into the ether with no sign that it's actually been posted that they'll post it a second time.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I know what you mean, but I can see (maybe) why they don't. If nothing else, it informs the spammer that he is on the wrong track immediately and that he should try tweaking his message.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
But the message not appearing in the forum already does that.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
