|
Please see the code sample in my answer, this one: How to update UI from other threads?[^].
The "ghost" tags "p", "div" and "pre" appeared inside the code sample (<pre>). Note that the tag "p" never appears in the source, it is inserted during submission, created from the end-of-line characters and then escaped. As to the other tags, "code" comes from outside of "pre"; and I didn't see unbalanced tags.
It looks like a regression bug to me; recently, it worked correctly.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed, I also found this happening in one the articles that I was moderating yesterday but I thought it was something author has messed up with.
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
OK, that's seriously annoying.
CommonMark is meant to fix the issues inherent in other Markdown implementation while being true to the core ideas of Markdown. However, if it can't even understand that when it's inside a PRE block it should not apply Markdown transformations (PRE means "preformatted", after all) then it's dead to me.
Disabling Markdown in QA and reverting back to MarkdownSharp.
This makes me sad.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Negative result is still much better than nothing. 
Thank you for the answer and editing my post as well. I noticed another thing: < and > were escaped inside "pre" element, so it was rendered as < and > so I changed them back to actual angular bracket characters. (Your edition of my post left them as such.) Will it be this way since this moment of time? I mean, without using "encode" seen on the menu above…
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
How it is right now is how it will be for QA for the foreseeable future.
I am working on a Markdown parser (yeah, and I put bamboo slivers under my fingernails for fun, too) to provide us with a Markdown processor that's flexible, fast and allows control of odd Markdown decisions. It won't be ready for a number of weeks though.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you. If I may, my opinion: we need consistency much more than the advanced features. If we simply had exactly the same markup features in all posts, even comments, it would be the best. (Even if it required using original HTML. I understand that it would not cover syntax coloring, which could be done on top of it.)
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
What CommonMark parser did you use?
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 looked at the CommonMark spec, and I agree, that is a very stupid decision.
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???
|
|
|
|
|
You may want to look at CMarkSharp[^], a wrapper around a C CommonMark library that parses to an AST that can then be manipulated to get the desired outcome. The wrapper supports all features of the native library.
What do you think?
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???
|
|
|
|
|
All QA comments seem to have lost their line-breaks this evening. Was this a deliberate decision, or an oversight?
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Neither. "It worked in testing". I'm looking into it now to see what's happening, but that's certainly not the intent.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
When typing Answer, the preview don't like if there is more than 1 piece of code and get corrupted. When answer is validated, display is OK.
When improving the answer, preview is corrupted differently.
Using <span class="highlight"></span> in a piece of code can get really complicated and almost impossible to improve (edit).
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Can you please try now?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Looks way better 
Thanks
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Secondary effect: some <p> tags are inserted around every paragraph.
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
The current method of dealing with Spam messages and their authors is somewhat labour intensive. The discoverer has to create a new message in the forum with a link to the spam message, and the spammer's account. It also has the drawback that spam messages disappear quicker than the spammers. This means we mostly have to take it on trust that our fellow spam hunters have correctly identified the perp.
This is probably too much to ask but ... how about something along the lines of:
- When a message is flagged as spam, it is immediately moved to the Spam and Abuse forum.
- Any message in this forum can be flagged as not-spam, and returned whence it came.
- Every additional spam flag following the initial one gets added to a (weighted) count.
- When the message count reaches a sufficient level, both message and spammer are removed.
I'm not sure how QA messages could fit into such a system, but the forums seem to be the main target of spammers these days.
|
|
|
|
|
I like your thinking. How about something cleaner:
Whenever someone marks a message as spam it goes into the same spam moderation queue that all automatically marked spam goes into. That way we have a single system, and a single point of reference for spam.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
That's fine as far as it goes, but it still means we have to add a message somewhere to identify the account that posted it. Getting rid of the messages is easy, getting rid of the spammers is somewhat less so. But I'm sure you experts will come up with something brilliant.
|
|
|
|
|
We already have the ability to auto-nuke member accounts when message reports hit a certain threshold. Unfortunately there were too many accounts getting nuked because of trigger fingers so we've backed away from allowing auto-nuking.
It makes it more work for sure, but it protects members from unintended consequences.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
What would be useful is for auto notification when marking spam in moderation. So, you say that something is spam, then a message is automatically created in the spam forum, including links to the messages/answers/comments for the account being moderated. This is the manual part that we end up doing anyway, so cutting this out would be a huge time saver, and doesn't have the effect that auto-nuke has - members are still required to vote. I would be tempted to make this option a separate one from just marking something as spam - make it explicit that the moderator wants to take this action.
|
|
|
|
|
I like the idea. If possible, this seems quite clean and still saves time and keystrockes 
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, I remember this account. He posted a very spammy answer of SQL command to an answer which had nothing to do with SQL itself. As soon as I report as "Not an answer" the answer was gone.
Checking into my flags for "Not an answer" may help in finding that answer, maybe. By thinking hard, I (just think), think the answer was posted on: How Memory map is done in a processor[^].
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I misclicked vote up/down button, then there is no way to cancel it. There should be a way of cancelling.
TVMU^P[[IGIOQHG^JSH A#@RFJ\c^JPL>;"[, /|+&WLEZGc
AFXc!L<br />
%^]*IRXD#@GKCQ R\^SF_WcHbORY87֦ʻ6ϣN8ȤBcRAV\Z^&SU~%CSWQ@#2
W_ADEPABIKRDFVS)EVLQK)JKQUFK[MUKs$GwU#QDXBER@CBN%
R0~53%eYrd8mt^7Z6]iTF+(EWfJ9zaK-iTV.C\y<pjxsg-b$f4ia> -----------------------------------------------
128 bit encrypted signature, crack if you can
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
