|
I vaguely remember that it depended on how much you change - more than 10% of the content was required, but that doesn't appear any more.
I do know that there are rep hunters out there that randomly edit questions/answers with meaningless changes to try and gain reputation 
|
|
|
|
|
The code in C# 2X8 ARRAY Placing Similar Items[^] appeared to have "accidentally" fallen into markdown for part of the code.
It was so ugly, that I tried to improve it with a regular pre tag set.
Now, it shows a <pre> tag in the middle of the code (that doesn't appear when editing!)
and HTML entities in the pre region are not behaving as entities, they are appearing as plain text.
I.e., an < in the editor, to represent an < still shows as < in the actual page.
Perhaps something to specifically indicate that markdown is being used in the posting would be good, or else defaulting to code for anything indented could get pretty ugly...
A positive attitude may not solve every problem, but it will annoy enough people to be worth the effort.
|
|
|
|
|
My congratulations with April 1st!
Second year in a row, I try to set a right data on my 1st of April articles, and fail in both cases, but by the opposite reasons.
This is the first case: Power Over IP: Testing of the First Experimental Facility[^]
This is the second one, today's: Some Programming Approaches to "Neuro-Linguistic Programming"[^].
First time, I tried to publish it exactly on April 1st, but the editing shifted it to 2 April 2014, not even my editing, but in the moderation (I wonder why). So it says:
Title: 2 Apr 2014
First posted: 30 Mar 2014 (but I think it wasn't the actual post, only the first draft),
Updated: Updated: 2 Apr 2014.
Taking this experience in account, I published today's article in advance, on 30 March, in order to make last change today. But now, the behavior is different: edition don't shift the title date, and, even worse, presented timing incorrectly reflects actual edition time:
Title: 30 Mar 2015
First posted: 30 Mar 2015
Updated: 30 Mar 2015 (plain wrong: it was updated today).
Note that "updated" is presently shown on only on the publication list page (http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/SAKryukov#articles[^]), and not on the article pages. It is inconsistent.
Apparently, there are more characteristic time marks in the life cycle
- Creation of the article on the site, not published, not open to the public. Probably it does not need to be shown.
- First saved draft, if any ("Save" instead of "Publish"). It may be important to see for possible legal/priority issues.
- First time publication of the article, open to all readers. Important.
- Last modification time. Also important.
- Anything else?
We have some inconsistency here, but making it consistent might be not enough. Can we be completely certain about timing. Any suggestions?
[EDIT]
Also, some detail such as votes number (probably some other statistical figures, I don' remember exactly) are shown inconsistently between the article page and article list page. Of course, I cannot reproduce it  . Obviously, this situation changes with time, but the inconsistency can be seen most of the time now.
Thank you very much.
—SASergey A Kryukov
modified 1-Apr-15 13:58pm.
|
|
|
|
|
April Fools!! 
|
|
|
|
|
You are, too, invited to have some fun with me, and especially participate in the article discussions.
As to the fools… In our folk tradition, there is a saying "The fairy tale is lie, but it has a hint, the lesson for the brave guys".
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
For future reference, edit it offline and send it direct to Sean (in plenty of time), I'm sure he will help.
|
|
|
|
|
I understand you, thank you, but final corrections on the site makes a lot of benefits, final look and feel...
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Sergey, Consider that April 1 on CP may be a "moving target" by design.
cheers, Bill
«To kill an error's as good a service, sometimes better than, establishing new truth or fact.» Charles Darwin in "Prospero's Precepts"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where is this link?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
The one after the "Use Markdown formatting" checkbox.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Just to the right of the "Use Markdown" checkbox below (when in Edit/Reply mode).
|
|
|
|
|
Example URL :
http://www.codeproject.com/WebServices/ArticleRSS.aspx?amid=20248[^]
This happens quite intermittently and arbitrarily. At times, instead of returning the articles for the specified author-id, it just returns the latest articles. Looks like you have a fallback / try-catch / timeout handler that defaults to that. I'd say the fallback should at least return an empty collection and not return a completely incorrect list of articles.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew's on it.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Awesome. Go Matthew! 
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed. @OutputCache issue. Works like a charm now.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Matthew. Appreciate the quick fix.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a feeling you're going to regret adding this option! 
After a list with inline code:
Markdown formatting doesn't work on this line;
neither do line-breaks, even with the double-space on the end;
only a <br> tag will break the line.
However, the next line works,
including line-breaks.
Also, list items spanning multiple lines have extra line-breaks unless at least one of the items has an in-line code block:
- Item 1
Second line - Item 2
Second line
Adding in-line code fixes the display:
- Item 1 with
code
Second line - Item 2
Second line
If you don't add a blank line after a list, it doesn't seem to close the <ul> / <ol> tag in the preview.
(The posted message is fine, though.)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: I have a feeling you're going to regret adding this option!
No idea what you mean.
(Fixed)
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Are you sure?
Markdown formatting doesn't work on this line;
but line-breaks are working now.
The next line works,
including line-breaks.
List formatting seems to be fixed:
- Item 1
Second line - Item 2
Second line
Forgetting the blank line still messes with the preview, and makes your signature part of the list, but that's not a huge problem:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I think I'm sure.
Markdown formatting doesn't work on this line;
but line-breaks are working now.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I've noticed this with all recent messages: before the actual message, there's an empty line. I don't believe it should be there.
Is this just me, by design, or a design bug?
The quick red ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
It's with the new 'markdown formatting'.
You can 'opt' out of it tho, there is a checkbox below the reply and new message window (under the 'allow private email replies...' checkbox).
Then your editor returns to how you knew it.
The checkbox even gets saved so you only have to do it once.
Tom
|
|
|
|
|
Hm. Looks like the text gets now sometimes wrapped in a <p> tag. Probably depending on the use of "Use Markdown formatting"...
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
