|
Thank you very much for your reply.
Sorry I was imprecise. Often I add also a link in the comment. This I do by:
a.) copy the link into the answer field of the question, this will Format the link
c.) then I copy/paste back the formatted link into the comment.
Usually the formatted link is very big.
Anyway not a problem at all. For comment only it is big enough.
Thank you.
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems LaTeX for my article doesn't work: Maths in IT #1: Basic set theory[^].
It displays text such as: (\lambda \notin E)
I know it worked before as I manually entered and checked it (my posts after this one have images instead of 'direct' LaTeX so they work fine).
[Edit]
Replaced the LaTeX in the article with images, just like my other articles.
[/Edit]
modified 6-Dec-15 15:22pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I guess it is!
Only noticed it a few days back.
The fun part is my article is getting good ratings even though it's now full with weird codes that don't make sense 
|
|
|
|
|
Best "Everything Else" Article of November 2015
"The Challenges of Building a Visual Designer - Chris Boss" The Challenges of Building a Visual Designer[^]
Articles » Third Party Products » Reviews on Third Party Products and Tools » General
«I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center» Kurt Vonnegut.
|
|
|
|
|
The blog aggregator "does its best" to find a section. It doesn't do a great job. This one time though I will say in its defense, it's tricky to place.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
I am sure am happy you boys got yourself a "blog aggravater" to take some of the load off; I just hope the mood-swings don't trouble you too much if you can't afford to feed it rare meat often enough.
cheers, Bill
«I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center» Kurt Vonnegut.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's a blog entry.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
Even more fun! It's still there twice, and it's still in the "best mobile article of the month" competition!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Message Removed
modified 15-Dec-15 11:53am.
|
|
|
|
|
Message Removed
modified 15-Dec-15 11:53am.
|
|
|
|
|
On some sites (like Stack Overflow), you can write something about yourself like here on Code Project. But my problem is now that I will to add the flair from Code Project to Stack Overflow but they doesn't accept iframe's. Can the flair used as an image so I can add that to Stack Overflow?
|
|
|
|
|
When trying to upload a profile picture, Im shown:
Something bad happened
We're not sure what, but we have a few guesses.
Problem: Illegal characters in path.
Ticket: 0
Server: Web02
... with the hamsters eater the server 
Trying to upload a 7kb profile image, nothing unusal from what I can tell. Happens on 2 PC's different images.
I've also unticked the Gravatar option.
modified 2-Dec-15 20:22pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you deselect gravatar, save, THEN try to upload? That's the only way it will work. The save in the middle is the magic here.
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.
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
I just faced this problem many times in a row when I tried to edit my article published today and fix it in few select points.
If I past whole HTML, which I always preserve, it all works correctly. If I do a minor change using the CodeProject editor, all anchors <a id="..."> disappear on post. I failed to spot any pattern in this problem: probably it happens not in all cases, but almost. Nothing bad happens to the link anchors.
For example, for an article section title, my pattern of using the anchor, in simplest case, looks like this:
<a id="a7"></a><h2>Some Top-Level Section Title</h2>
Let's say, I remove a character from the title text. The whole anchor part disappears on the post; it happens to all anchors of the whole article. Note that using name in an anchor is considered obsolete; I did not test if the problem appears in that sort of anchors.
The only workaround I've found so far is to paste complete HTML.
—SASergey A Kryukov
modified 2-Dec-15 15:58pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Are you using <a id="7"... for an anchor? Try using <a name="7"... or <div id="7"...
CKEditor tends to cleanup empty tags.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
This is what I've done before, but when I started to use Visual Studio for HTML, it gave me a warning: using name in anchors is obsolete. Come to think about, this is perfectly logical: name does not enforce uniqueness, but anchors require uniqueness.
Yes, <div id="..."> does work as an anchor, as well as h2, p, etc. (But does it really comply with the standards? I never used it, so I'm not sure. Technically, using for, say, headers, <h2 id="section1">Section One<h2> would be most convenient; would you advise that?)
Or would <a id="id"><h2>Section Title</h2></a> be any better? Please advise.
By the way, I never noticed that the editor removed any empty elements, but I always faced adding redundant markup on post. Last time it was adding <p> </p> inside empty lines; I removed it and it did not appear again; I have no clue why.
Thank you.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov wrote: But does it really comply with the standards?
According to this SO answer[^] it is:
...
3. If there is an element in the DOM that has an ID exactly equal to fragid, then the first such element in tree order is the indicated part of the document; stop the algorithm here.
4. If there is an a element in the DOM that has a name attribute whose value is exactly equal to fragid, then the first such element in tree order is the indicated part of the document; stop the algorithm here.
5. Otherwise, there is no indicated part of the document.
One of the comments also suggests that the name attribute isn't technically valid on the <a> tag in HTML5, but there's no link to back it up.
Another comment points out that using the id is part of the HTML 4.01[^] specification, and works even in IE6.
Destination anchors in HTML documents may be specified either by the A element (naming it with the name attribute), or by any other element (naming with the id attribute).
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Again, thank you very much for this piece of information and your kind help.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Chris,
You might be interested to know what worked for me.
Thank you for the hint you provided. I checked up some information and changed markup using <div id="..."> approach (in fact, "<p id=...", "<pre id=...", and the like), but not "<a name=" (which is not considered as legitimate, according to the present-day standards). Instead, I completely eliminated all anchors except <a href=" (links). Some say, non-href anchors are not really needed and are best avoided. I think this way should be the recommended one.
After correcting it all and re-posting the article, I tried to test its stability by editing small piece in-place. Not too surprisingly, nothing bad happened.
Thank you again.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent - glad it all worked.
Yes, a name="..." is definitely old-school (and as your rightly point out, fraught with non-uniqueness issues).
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov wrote: <a id="a7"/></a>
Is that extra "/" a typo in your message, or what you're actually adding to the article? It should be:
<a id="a7"></a>
As a workaround, adding the id to the <h2> element should have the same effect.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Right. That was only a typo in the bug report, not what I actually used in the article.
Thank you very much for your help.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
this[^] and this[^] are "new" versions of articles that I suppose were nuked due to reporting (at least the first one was a potential rejection due to poor quality). But they seem to have resurrected and appear another time as new contributions in the queue as wizard auto-saved drafts.
Are they a try of the owners to bring them back?
Is this normal behavior? If yes, I find it a bit odd.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
