Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Story Formatting, Auto-format, and more Dynamic Mode Updates

By rusty in Site News
Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:23:39 PM EST
Tags: Kuro5hin.org (all tags)
Kuro5hin.org

It seems like I've been writing one of these every day lately, but once again, we have new Scoop stuff, courtesy of Joe Groff, panner, and the rest of your friendly neighborhood Scoop development team.
[editor's note, by hurstdog] This update added a small bug by me introduced by fixing another :-/ The front page poll is everywhere. I'll update this story when I fix it tonight. No need to email help@ anymore. Sorry for the problems.

Update [2002-4-30 0:20:25 by hurstdog]: Fixed.


Dynamic mode Updates:

In response to some requests, dynamic mode has a couple new things. First, the threads in dynamic-threaded and dynamic-minimal will now start all the way to the left of the page, like they do in nested or regular threaded. Hopefully this will make it easier to keep track of what thread depth you're looking at.

There is also now a "collapse" button at the bottom of expanded dynamic comments, so you don't have to scroll all the way back up to the top to collapse one. The bottom collapse button will kick you up to the comment's collapsed titlebar, as well.

Finally, as a few people pointed out, once you've expanded a comment the first time (and loaded it's text from the server), there's no reason to reload it from the server every time thereafter. So now dynamic mode only fetches fresh data from the server on the first expand, and the first collapse. Thereafter, it loads it from a cache in the page's DOM. You should notice that subsequent expands are much quicker, and don't go through the "Loading..." step.

Story Formatting:

Stories can (finally!) now be formatted like comments, in any of three modes: HTML (formerly the only option), Plain text, and Auto-format. Auto-format? What the heck is that? I hear you wondering. Which brings us to...

Auto-Format Mode:

In addition to the old plain-text and html formatting modes for comments and stories, you can now also use the nifty new auto-format mode. Basically, it's a simplified posting mode that works in a "Do what I mean" kind of way. Here's how auto-format works:

  • Line breaks and paragraph breaks:

    Like plain-text mode, hitting return will insert a line break, hitting return twice (i.e. inserting a blank line) will add a paragraph break.

  • Bold text:

    Wrapping some text in asterisks will make that text appear bold. So, if I entered: "This text *should be bold*." It will render as: "This text should be bold." Technically, I believe it renders with <strong>.

  • Italics:

    Like bold, wrapping text with underscores or slashes will render it as <em> (usually italics). So: "This text /should be italic/." or "This text _should be italic_." will render as "This text should be italic."

  • Lists:

    You can create unordered or ordered lists by simply listing items on new lines, starting with either numbers, or asterisks. So:

    * This is a list
    * This is the second item
    * This is the third item

    Will render as:

    • This is a list
    • This is the second item
    • This is the third item

    Had I used 1., 2., and 3. instead of *, it would render as an ordered list.

  • Links:

    Bare URLs will be turned into links. So http://www.kuro5hin.org would appear in the comment as http://www.kuro5hin.org. Or, if you wanna be fancy, enclosing some text and a link in brackets will link the text to the URL. For example, "The following text [should be a link to K5 http://www.kuro5hin.org]." will render as "The following text should be a link to K5."

    This will work with square brackets ([]), curly brackets ({}), or angle brackets (<>). Use whichever you like.

So, formatting comments and stories should now be a lot easier for those of you who either don't want to learn html, or (like me) are just sick of typing it all the time. Incidentally, right now, you can't use other HTML in auto-format mode (it works like plain-text, aside from it's own formatting codes), but we may soon switch that so that auto-format will accept any allowed HTML, in addition to doing it's own magic.

Update [2002-4-30 2:8:7 by rusty]: You can now use equals signs to make monospaced text. So =this= would be rendered as this. You may also use normal allowed HTML in auto-format mode, if you find yourself needing the more obscure formatting that we allow. And finally, putting a backslash before any special character will escape it (i.e. display it literally). so \* will give you just an asterisk. This works for URLs as well -- to enter a non-linked url, just preceed it with a backslash.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Related Links
o Scoop
o Kuro5hin
o http://www .kuro5hin.org
o should be a link to K5
o Also by rusty


Display: Sort:
Story Formatting, Auto-format, and more Dynamic Mode Updates | 179 comments (179 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)
this would make more sense.... (3.33 / 3) (#1)
by enterfornone on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:26:18 PM EST

*bold* /italics/ _underline_

--
efn 26/m/syd
Will sponsor new accounts for porn.
Underline! Heathen! (2.00 / 1) (#5)
by Electric Angst on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:30:27 PM EST

I don't know why, but underline seems to be the one thing that they never turn on. It wasn't on Slashdot, it's not here. I've always wondered why...
--
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster." - Nietzsche
The Parent ]
Because underlines are used for links (none / 0) (#70)
by Bnonn on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:59:11 PM EST

and are ugly. Read up &:>

[ Parent ]
Yupp! (none / 0) (#6)
by cem on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:32:15 PM EST

But now's too late.


Young Tarzan: I'll be the best ape ever!
[ Parent ]
No underline (5.00 / 2) (#7)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:32:25 PM EST

I have a pet peeve against underlining. It makes text look like it's a link when it isn't. On the web, I find that intensely annoying. So, there isn't an underline mode.

That said, slashes already do italics. Which I didn't know. But now I do. :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

underlines and links (3.00 / 1) (#13)
by cetan on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:45:54 PM EST

You're only annoyed by it because of how crappy UI is on the web.  If sites were developed with proper UI, you'd know the difference between a link and an underline instantly.

===== cetan www.cetan.com =====
[ Parent ]
Could be (none / 0) (#16)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:50:32 PM EST

My hands are more or less tied by the standard html conventions. I'd much rather the link standard wasn't underlining, but considering that's what it is...

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
Could you not... (none / 0) (#63)
by Bnonn on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:46:24 PM EST

...use a rollover on links? Afaik it's a standard HTML convention and, while links on K5 tend to range between blue and black, it shouldn't be a problem if all links lit up paler blue, or were non-underlined by default until mouseover.

Just a thought. There's probably a good reason you decided not to do this, but personally I'd find it quite convenient.

[ Parent ]

Platform independence (none / 0) (#79)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 10:21:32 PM EST

Yeah, we could do all kinds of tricky things, and I'm sure it wouldn't be a huge deal for many people to distinguish between underlined stuff and a link. But, on the other hand, who needs to underline anything? :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
Oh god no ... (none / 0) (#166)
by Rizzen on Thu May 02, 2002 at 03:59:28 PM EST

... mouseover links have got to be the *most* annoying "feature" of HTML.

I want to be able to see a link just by looking, not by moving my mouse over every inch of screen.

Just because we all tend to use a GUI does not mean we all use the mouse.
The years of peak mental activity are undoubtedly those between the ages of 4 and 18. At age four, we know all the questions; at eighteen, all the answers.
[ Parent ]

link standard? (none / 0) (#66)
by Delirium on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:48:31 PM EST

AFAIK, the link standard is blue underlining, which is not very easily confusable with normal text color underlining. And for those on lynx, too damn bad, get a real browser. =P

[ Parent ]
What could work. (4.50 / 2) (#22)
by xriso on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:17:50 PM EST

Use automatic blink tags for links.
--
*** Quits: xriso:#kuro5hin (Forever)
[ Parent ]
blink tags?! (5.00 / 1) (#49)
by infinitera on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 07:59:21 PM EST

No, not the evil monstrosity! Keep it away! Aahhh!!!

[ Parent ]
blink tag use (none / 0) (#163)
by ToastyKen on Thu May 02, 2002 at 01:45:33 AM EST

I wrote a branching time travel story once where I blinked the colon in the timestamp at the top of the page.  It was subtle and called attention (but not too much) to the timestamp on each page, so the reader doesn't forget to take note of it.  I was so happy that I had found what may well be the one positive use of the blink tag.   But then I discovered that IE never supported it, so most people wouldn't even see it.  Oh well.

[ Parent ]
Links are underlined? (4.00 / 1) (#47)
by sjl on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 07:42:23 PM EST

Could've fooled me. Then again, that neat little "Underline links" checkbox in "Appearance/Colors" in Mozilla might have something to do with it. ;-)

I actually find web pages much easier to read this way. Because links are still in a different colour, I can still pick them easily, but they don't disturb the flow quite as much without the spurious underlining.

[ Parent ]

exactly (none / 0) (#135)
by ethereal on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 09:57:34 AM EST

Of course, after you've switched to non-underlined-links-mode, there's nothing more annoying than either:

  • Sites that force their links to show up as underlined anyway (why anyone would do this I have no idea), or
  • Sites that set their link color to be the same as the other text, on the assumption that you'll click on underlines. So if you can't see the underline, you have no idea where the text is (Penny Arcade is particularly bad about this). Other sites set their visited link color to be the text color, so that you can't see where you've been (/. for example).

On the most part, no underlines with these troubles is still better than having a zillion underlines on the page.

--

Every time you read this, God wishes k5 had a "hide sigs" option. Please, think of the
[
Parent ]

I disagree. (none / 0) (#154)
by static on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 08:23:00 PM EST

I am more than happy to see links with underlines. It's a good use for an otherwise hijacked printer's convention*. What bugs me more is sites that decide they want links to not be underlined and then fail to disambiguate them in other ways. A rollover is not sufficient. I have overlooked such "invisible" links on web pages before - and then had to endure the webmaster (almost) laughing at me when I complained.

Perhaps I should use that user CSS trick someone posted; I believe it works in Opera, too.

Wade.

* for which someone will no doubt tell me I'm wrong.


[ Parent ]

Layout issues (4.00 / 1) (#56)
by ttfkam on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:21:08 PM EST

I guess the whole problem lies in putting any layout markup in the comment in the first place.

<deadhorse action="beat">DocBook</deadhorse>

<question type="rhetorical">But then if people are too lazy to learn HTML, what hope do we have of implementing something better?</question>

Truth is, just choosing one method and sticking with it is probably the better solution.  But with the myriad of sites and dizzying array of "web-based formatting techniques," I guess I'll just have to learn to live with disappointment.

Not a crack on you Rusty.  Kudos for your work on K5.

If I'm made in God's image then God needs to lay off the corn chips and onion dip. Get some exercise, God! - Tatarigami
[ Parent ]

Unless I'm mistaken... (none / 0) (#68)
by Bnonn on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:51:56 PM EST

...the lyrics go, "Nobody loves me; everybody hates me--guess I'll go eat worms."

It's been so long since I'd heard this that I can't remember if it's a song or something from a children's book, but that phrase sticks in my head. Sorry if I'm wrong; I just had to reply coz you're probably the first person I've seen online who knows the worm song...

Long thin slimey ones, short fat juicy ones...

Yeah, it's all coming back now. "Myriad sites", btw. There's no "of".

&:>

[ Parent ]

myriad (none / 0) (#91)
by johnathan on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 11:41:39 PM EST

"Myriad sites", btw. There's no "of".
Not so. "Myriad" is both a noun and an adjective. "A myriad of sites" and "myriad sites" are both correct.

From m-w:
2 : a great number (a myriad of ideas)

--
Her profession's her religion; her sin: her lifelessness.
[ Parent ]

Humm (none / 0) (#98)
by Bnonn on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 12:53:26 AM EST

Apparently the word has been bastardised in the US, since you appear to be quoting from Mirriam-Webster. You are correct that myriad is both a noun and adjective. However, from The Oxford Concise 10th edition:

myriad poetic/literary n. 1 an indefinitely great number. 2 (chiefly in classical history) a unit of ten thousand.
adj. innumerable > having innumerable elements: the myriad political scene.
-ORIGIN C16: via late L. from Gk murias, muriad-, from murioi '10,000'.

The origin of the word explains why you can't (or at least, shouldn't) correctly say "a myriad of something", though you may be able to push the definition and say "myriads of something".

Apparently general ignorance/laziness has changed the accepted usage, at least in the US. I stand corrected.

[ Parent ]

I learned it in the Boy Scouts (none / 0) (#108)
by ttfkam on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 02:58:26 AM EST

...years and years ago.  It's a campfire song.  Since it has been so long and I never actually looked it up, I'm sure I got it wrong and you were correct.

...itsy bitsy fuzzy wuzzy worms.

If I'm made in God's image then God needs to lay off the corn chips and onion dip. Get some exercise, God! - Tatarigami
[ Parent ]

He had it right [n/t] (none / 0) (#170)
by rjo on Fri May 03, 2002 at 05:20:59 PM EST



[ Parent ]
HTML sucks (none / 0) (#78)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 10:19:28 PM EST

HTML sucks. All browsers suck, to greater or lesser degrees. Every good feature of the web, from a developer's point of view, is offset by about 20 really really stupid ones that we all have to work around. The web is a WorseIsBetter solution, in almost every way. But, well, some of us make peace with that and just deal with the suckitude, and some of us don't.

Needless to say, if working on the web is going to be a major part of your life, it's probably best to deal with it sooner rather than later. :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

I've found another way (none / 0) (#110)
by ttfkam on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 03:14:15 AM EST

I quit my job and now work on the web for fun for a change.  As a matter of fact, I'm in the process of getting one up as we speak.  DocBook, XSLT, and all of that fun.  Through in a dash of Tux and I'll soon be ready to go.

Yes in general the web is indeed a WorseIsBetter solution.  The bright side to not working for a company and bulding/maintaining their web site(s) is that I get to be an idealist.  It's been a while for me; Don't spoil it!

Believe it or not by just sacrificing Netscape 4 on The Altar of Good Taste I can torch a lot of the bad habits that I learned over the past few years: spacer GIFs, tables as a layout mechanism, font tags everywhere, etc.  Just providing a custom CSS file per browser is sufficient (and a lot easier than reworking HTML).

But alas I must suck a bit longer before I can effectively use my beloved alpha transparency in PNGs.  I guess you can't have everything.

No, I will not make peace with the suck.  I will fight it and sacrifice browsers (and their human users) to do it.  The worst that will happen is that I lose a few viewers.  And let's face it, losing Netscape 4 users and IE 4 for the Mac users is not going to make a major impact on anyone's viewership.  Besides, it's not like I can get fired at this point.  Heh heh.  It's not like Netscape 4 users (or Lynx users) won't see the content at all; It's CSS.  Graceful degradation and all that.

More folks should try extended, voluntary unemployment.  It really works out the deep knots.

If I'm made in God's image then God needs to lay off the corn chips and onion dip. Get some exercise, God! - Tatarigami
[ Parent ]

I have a dream... (none / 0) (#116)
by codemonkey_uk on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 05:43:06 AM EST

One day I will be independatly wealthy. Not super-rich, but well enough off that I can comfortably support my family with the interest I earn on my savings. I don't want the big, house, and the fast car, and the fancy holidays. I want to be able to stay at home with my girl and my baby, and know the morgage will be paied and there will be food on the table.

Then, while the little lads at school I will make cool games and give them away for free. I will teach people how to code, and I will learn new stuff, just because I can.
---
Thad
"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there is no good evidence either way." - Bertrand Russell
[ Parent ]

Wonderful (none / 0) (#117)
by QuickFox on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 05:49:53 AM EST

More folks should try extended, voluntary unemployment.  It really works out the deep knots.

Sounds wonderful. I want that too. There's just one little detail: How do you convince someone to pay your rent and daily food?

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fis
[ Parent ]

Underlines (none / 0) (#112)
by Yer Mom on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 05:10:19 AM EST

Speaking as someone who disables underlining on links (because underlines are butt-ugly) I'd like an option to change the link colours - disable underlining and you can scarcely see what's a link and what isn't...

Maybe we could provide the URL to our own stylesheet in the Display Preferences :)
--
Smoke crack. Worship Satan. Admin Unix.
[ Parent ]

Oooh, yes! (none / 0) (#129)
by Chancellor Martok on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 08:35:59 AM EST

Specifying our own CSS would be a cool feature, although I don't mind what K5 looks like now, except maybe if links weren't underlined even on hover...

-----
Chancellor Martok  in Sydney, Australia
"Castrate instead. That can surely rehabilitate. I did it volunatrily, and my grades went up!"  -- Sen

[ Parent ]
If you use Mozilla... (none / 0) (#141)
by mauftarkie on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 02:03:55 PM EST

... add this to your userContent.css (found in the chrome sub-directory in your preferences directory):

A:link { text-decoration: none !important; }
A:visited { text-decoration: none !important; }
A:active { text-decoration: none !important; }
A:hover { text-decoration: underline !important; }

Underlined links go away and will reappear when the mouse hovers over them. For every website. I've been using it for months now and love it.


--
Without you I'm one step closer to happiness without violence.
Without you I'm one step closer to innocence without consequence.


[ Parent ]
Clarification... (none / 0) (#158)
by Chancellor Martok on Wed May 01, 2002 at 09:45:11 AM EST

Sorry, I don't know if I made it clear or not, but by "weren't underlined even on hover" I meant at the moment links are not underlined until hovered over. I wish links weren't underlined even when I hover over them.

Well I guess I could force that stylesheet on all the pages I visit even though I'm using IE... except I thought IE doesn't support !important?

-----
Chancellor Martok  in Sydney, Australia
"Castrate instead. That can surely rehabilitate. I did it volunatrily, and my grades went up!"  -- Sen

[ Parent ]

Slash works just like underscore (4.00 / 1) (#8)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:34:27 PM EST

/This would be rendered in italics/, _as would this_. Underlined text could be mistaken for a link, and is not a good design element.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
One of the first rules of typography... (5.00 / 2) (#20)
by 90X Double Side on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:13:48 PM EST

is never underline anything. Underlining is the typewriter version of italics, and you are not using a typewriter. You can put rules below display type, but that's not applicable to k5, so you have no need for an evil underline option.

It amazes me how none of the members of the "computer generation" know how to type on a compuer ;)

“Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity”
—Alvy Ray Smith
[ Parent ]

I don't even know what a compuer is :) (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by enterfornone on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:20:31 PM EST



--
efn 26/m/syd
Will sponsor new accounts for porn.
[ Parent ]
Not entirely correct (3.00 / 1) (#52)
by ttfkam on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:13:12 PM EST

The "proper" way to denote a novel's title is by underlining.  Poems, songs, and the like are properly represented by enclosure within quotation marks.

But then again, all living languages mutate and evolve.  Today's English bears little resemblance to the English of seven hundred years ago.  American English is noticeably different from Australian English.  I guess the whole "proper" argument is moot.  Let's just aim for consistency.

If I'm made in God's image then God needs to lay off the corn chips and onion dip. Get some exercise, God! - Tatarigami
[ Parent ]

No, you're incorrect (5.00 / 1) (#54)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:16:04 PM EST

In handwriting, underlining a major work (such as a novel)'s title is correct. In print, italicising the title is correct. Anywhere underlining is deemed proper in handwritten work, italics are more correct in type.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
I stand corrected (n/t) (none / 0) (#64)
by ttfkam on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:46:39 PM EST


If I'm made in God's image then God needs to lay off the corn chips and onion dip. Get some exercise, God! - Tatarigami
[ Parent ]
The convention changed... (none / 0) (#69)
by Bnonn on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:58:05 PM EST

...in February this year. Dinna fret; my journalism tutor only found out after he'd taught us to underline. I can't stand underlining personally so I'm ecstatic that we get to use the standard-everywhere-else italics instead. This is only the APA referencing style mind; I don't know what the other styles are like.

To the best of my knowledge, though, it's equally correct to italicise poems, song titles etc. I rather prefer it to quotations, since it avoids confusion. Quotation marks already have a purpose. Though, of course, you could argue that italics should be used for emphasis and emphasis alone. I'd agree with you, actually, if underlining didn't look so gratuitous.

[ Parent ]

Wrong (4.00 / 1) (#57)
by vectro on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:22:24 PM EST

The first rule of typography for prose is to never underline everything. Underlining is common (and can be beautiful) in advertising.

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]
I said... (none / 0) (#100)
by 90X Double Side on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 01:54:00 AM EST

That you can use underlining in display type. Do peope not even read entire 3-line comments anymore?

And remember, that you absolutely never use Style>Underline (page layout apps don't even have it anymore), you draw a rule youself at the appropriate distance and thickness.

“Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity”
—Alvy Ray Smith
[ Parent ]

You are correct. Sorry for the confrontation. [nt] (none / 0) (#103)
by vectro on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 02:21:04 AM EST



“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]
Auto-Format Rocks (none / 0) (#2)
by niralth on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:28:14 PM EST

Yay!  I can't tell you the number of times I've had to go back and actually link a URL in "Plain Text" mode.  Auto Format is the way to be.

rusty- (3.50 / 2) (#3)
by codespace on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:29:24 PM EST

You're the coolest. I've been wanting something like this for months.

_____
today on how it's made: kitchen knives, mannequins, socks and hypodermic needles.
Not me! (5.00 / 4) (#10)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:35:56 PM EST

Now I know how Linus feels. ;-)

I didn't write any of this. Joe Groff wrote it, and panner reviewed it for cvs checkin. I just said "Hey, that sounds neat. Why don't you write it? I'll be sure to take all the credit."

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

In that case... (5.00 / 2) (#28)
by codespace on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:48:29 PM EST

I take it back! You bastard!<br><br>

Heh... Pass my thanks along to those who deserve it, then.

_____
today on how it's made: kitchen knives, mannequins, socks and hypodermic needles.
[ Parent ]

Wow. (4.50 / 2) (#29)
by codespace on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:49:26 PM EST

I'm a dumbass.

I'm going to have to get used to this new-fangled Auto-Format doohickey.

_____
today on how it's made: kitchen knives, mannequins, socks and hypodermic needles.
[ Parent ]

Heh (none / 0) (#102)
by rusty on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 02:03:44 AM EST

Not so much. You can now use regular (allowed) HTML to complement the auto-format mode.

So, like, say I wanted to use auto-format, but happened to have need for a superscript?1 No problemo.

It's probably not a great idea to use <p> and the like, though, as they will insert a bunch of blank lines instead of what you wanted.

--
1 Like this.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Oh? That's cool... (none / 0) (#109)
by codespace on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 03:12:05 AM EST

I'm just going to have to get used to typing keeping the Auto Format in mind. I'm used to ending a line with a break, two if I'm going to do a paragraph break. It's sloppy, but it's how I've always done it.

Gee whiz.

_____
today on how it's made: kitchen knives, mannequins, socks and hypodermic needles.
[ Parent ]

Testing (4.75 / 4) (#4)
by coryking on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:29:52 PM EST

this is bold this is italic my dog likes dog pressure washers
  • this
  • is
  • a
  • list
  • of
  • stuff
there
was
a
dog

who
came
by
the
name
of

parker

Very nice! Well done

Test (4.00 / 2) (#9)
by joeyo on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:35:43 PM EST

This is a test.  
This is a test of autoformat.  
  • This
  • is
  1. only
  2. a
* test.

Beep!

--
"* I got to use the word 'churlish'!" -- Rusty

Note (5.00 / 2) (#11)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:40:50 PM EST

Lists will only be made if there are at least two elements, which is why "* test" above isn't <ul>'d.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
Ok (4.00 / 1) (#17)
by joeyo on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:08:13 PM EST

I was wondering if it was because of that or because of the mixed ul and ol (which is the case that I was trying to catch)

Btw, is there any way to cause markup to not apply?

Quotes?  "bold" ?

Nope.

Can I escape them?  \*bold\*

Heh Sorta. :)

--
"* I got to use the word 'churlish'!" -- Rusty
[ Parent ]

Things I'll be adding (5.00 / 2) (#23)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:18:20 PM EST

  • I'll make the backslash into a general escape character.
  • List generation will be made more robust. In addition to handling multiline elements, it also needs to support nested lists and other fancy stuff like that.
  • I might make indented blocks of text wrap themselves in <cite> or <blockquote>, though this might interfere with some uses of indentation. I'm not so sure about that yet.
  • A CODE:[....] block to wrap code fragments in.
  • Anything else people suggest that sounds good :-)

--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
Code blocks (4.00 / 1) (#44)
by QuickFox on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 07:28:52 PM EST

A CODE:[....] block to wrap code fragments in.
In my opinion the user should surround code with <code>...</code>, and you should look for this tag. The reason for this is that it's easy to remember because it's the standard tag. Practically everyone who submits code knows the tag, and others can learn it easily. We use it so seldom that saving a few keystrokes is less important for this tag. Also, "]" will appear within the code (giving a false termination) much more often than "</code>".

(Of course this will work only when your code accepts tags typed in the text.)

In blocks surrounded by <code>...</code> I suggest that you look for sequences of two or more space characters, and replace every second space character with &nbsp; . This way we can easily post code with proper indentation, and there's no risk of ugly page widening.

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fis
[ Parent ]

Regarding code (5.00 / 1) (#45)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 07:34:25 PM EST

In my opinion the user should surround code with <code>...</code>, and you should look for this tag. The reason for this is that it's easy to remember because it's the standard tag. Practically everyone who submits code knows the tag, and others can learn it easily. We use it so seldom that saving a few keystrokes is less important for this tag. Also, "]" will appear within the code (giving a false termination) much more often than "</code>".

Yeah, I'd like something like that. panner is planning on adding custom tag capability to Scoop so that things like this could work. The problem with using <code>, however, is that it already has a meaning in standard HTML, and changing that meaning for Scoop might confuse some people.

In blocks surrounded by <code>...</code> I suggest that you look for sequences of two or more space characters, and replace every second space character with &nbsp; . This way we can easily post code with proper indentation, and there's no risk of ugly page widening.

   Plaintext and Auto Format mode already do that. :-)
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]

What? Custom tags? (none / 0) (#61)
by QuickFox on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:42:31 PM EST

I didn't mean changing the meaning of <code> and turning it into some custom tag. I'm not sure what you mean by custom tags, but I meant just as a normal, ordinary HTML tag. Rusty wrote in the main article:

Incidentally, right now, you can't use other HTML in auto-format mode (it works like plain-text, aside from it's own formatting codes), but we may soon switch that so that auto-format will accept any allowed HTML, in addition to doing it's own magic.
Once those allowed standard HTML tags are accepted, when you find that the user has typed this standard HTML tag <code> in the text, then between <code> and </code> you assume that the user intends the text inside that block as code, so you do not replace /text/ with italics, and so on.

Or do you mean that this would give the tag a special meaning that might confuse users? To me it seems just a reasonable assumption, just like the browser reasonably assumes you want a fixed-width font when you write <code> ... </code> .

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fis
[ Parent ]

The <code> tag doesn't do what you think it (none / 0) (#65)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:48:13 PM EST

The <code> tag is essentially equal to <tt>; all it does is render the text between the tags in monospace font. What I want for a code markup is something that would:
  • Preserve whitespace in the original comment
  • Cause characters special to auto format or HTML to not have their special meanings (except for the terminating tag).
<code> doesn't do that.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
flipcode has <cpp></cpp> (none / 0) (#71)
by ramses0 on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 09:06:15 PM EST

Hi.

note, the following contains gratuitous tests of the new formatting toys ;^)

The popular website flipcode has a custom tag that looks like it "enscripts" c++ code if it is wrapped in a <cpp></cpp> tag.  Unfortunately, not all code is C++, and you won't always want to "enscript" output.

Perhaps a synonym for that nifty blue blockquote could be a string that begins only with a quote and ends only with a quote.

"So this would be auto-block-quoted"

Perhaps supporting an additional '--J. User' optional citation at the end of it.

"Blah blah, beware of bugs, I only proved it correct, etc." --D. Knuth

...but the regex might get hairy for that.  Plus,
"typewriter people" (or lynx users) might get
confused becuase by habit, they always press
return to advance to the next line.

You might be right to avoid overloading the <code> tag (although I'm curious as to how random tags render in the middle of text <rant>because the regexers always seem to mess up the rant tag!</rant>

The most natural way to post code is to enclose it in "code" tags, so it's very tempting to say "standards be damned".  Ever since the W3 got rid of the <menu> tag because "not many browsers render it differently from an OL" I lost my faith in them.

Perhaps you could use <text> or <txt>, since it seems to ~fit~ with the way people would use the rest of the tags.  (ie: TXT means don't screw with it :^)

Other than that, I've been waiting for something like this to happen ever since rusty started inviting people to this little party called K5, and thank you very much for taking care of it!  Your code officially passes my seal of approval as far as behaviour goes.

And an implementation question:  Do you store the comments in the database in original (unaltered form), regexing them every display, or is it a one-shot deal?  I'm interested to know which way to do it and why you made the decision.

--Robert
[ rate all comments , for great ju
[
Parent ]

Raw (none / 0) (#75)
by QuickFox on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 09:19:17 PM EST

(ie: TXT means don't screw with it :^)

If there will be a tag that says "don't screw with it" I'd prefer the word "raw" rather than "txt", very often "raw" has this meaning.

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fis
[ Parent ]

xmp (none / 0) (#137)
by jsoderba on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 12:03:02 PM EST

Why not use the <xmp> tag? That ignores tags and preserves whitespace.

This won't work if you want to be able to use HTML formating in the code block, of course.

[ Parent ]

Because... (none / 0) (#142)
by mauftarkie on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 02:07:41 PM EST

... it's not part of the HTML spec anymore. It was phased out some time ago, IIRC. At least, I couldn't find it in the W3C 4.01 specification page.


--
Without you I'm one step closer to happiness without violence.
Without you I'm one step closer to innocence without consequence.


[ Parent ]
Intended usage (5.00 / 1) (#73)
by QuickFox on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 09:09:54 PM EST

The <code> tag is essentially equal to <tt>; all it does is render the text between the tags in monospace font.

What you describe is the rendering of the tag contents in visual browsers. (By visual I mean non-voice and non-Braille). The intended meaning of the tag is that it marks program code.

What I'm suggesting is that you might assume that the content is program code, just like it's intended to be according to HTML standards. The fact that some people use this tag for purposes other than marking code might of course trip some users, but it seems to me that this is not a big problem.

When you say "Preserve whitespace" it sounds like <pre>. I think what you already have (replacing every second space character with &nbsp;) is a good solution and is sufficient.

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fis
[ Parent ]

Test (none / 0) (#62)
by QuickFox on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:42:49 PM EST

Plaintext and Auto Format mode already do that. :-)

Testing:

  for (Num = 0; Num < Thing.length; ++Num)
  { DoSomething();
    DoSomethingElse();
  }

Great!

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fis
[ Parent ]

Ick! (none / 0) (#84)
by fluffy grue on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 10:56:38 PM EST

Put some accessor functions around those members, fool!
--
"#kuro5hin [is like] a daycare center [where] the babysitter had been viciously murdered." -- CaptainObvious (we
[ Parent ]
Really? (none / 0) (#93)
by QuickFox on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 11:46:50 PM EST

Put some accessor functions around those members, fool!

Accessor functions? But then it's much less effective as a troll.

Ha! Gotcha!

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fis
[ Parent ]

Just wondering... (none / 0) (#72)
by Bnonn on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 09:06:17 PM EST

...why you use <STRONG> etc, instead of <B>? Is there a reason to do this, or does it come down to preference?

Not griping; just curious as someone who has never used the longer tags.

[ Parent ]

Describing content instead of layout (none / 0) (#74)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 09:12:43 PM EST

<strong> and <em> give semantic meaning to their contents, whereas <b> and <i> dictate presentation. HTML is supposed to describe the content, not the presentation (despite the fact that this ideal has obviously fallen to the wayside), and thus I elected to use <strong> and <em>. Since you don't have to type them by hand, the length of the tags should no longer be a problem.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
Ta (none / 0) (#82)
by Bnonn on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 10:42:26 PM EST

I guess it's a bit sad that, being a web designer of sorts, I never knew that. If that was the point of HTML it seems to have been lost, and awfully quickly at that--I guess because so much emphasis is put on presentation over of content.

Although short tags are quicker when you're typing in Notepad, of course. I wonder, if I'd learned <strong> instead of <b> and <em> instead of <i> if I'd find the short way easier though. It seems almost more intuitive to type a word, or at least an abbreviation, rather than a single letter.

[ Parent ]

Except this goes the wrong way (3.00 / 1) (#83)
by fluffy grue on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 10:55:01 PM EST

Now you've replaced the problem of "presenting vocal emphasis as visual layout" with "potentially presenting visual layout as vocal emphasis." The whole point to having B/STRONG and I/EM separate is so that if you want visual italics (which is usually the case when "underlining" things, such as a book title) it won't be interpreted as vocal emphasis, and so on.

Then again, I'm also leery about the choice of symbols and the ambiguous nature of such to begin with. Ambiguous parse trees make baby Jesus cry. Can't people just learn HTML? It's really not that hard. :D
--
"#kuro5hin [is like] a daycare center [where] the babysitter had been viciously murdered." -- CaptainObvious (we
[ Parent ]

I don't think that's a problem (4.00 / 1) (#85)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 11:06:46 PM EST

In plaintext media such as newsgroups or email, I usually perceive *text like this* as being vocally emphasised rather than visually. As for syntactic ambiguity, don't try to think about it that way. The idea I had when coding Auto Format was to act in a way that seems intuitive, where the text typed into this little box resembles what the output is going to be. HTML doesn't do that; while it's certainly more deterministic and more ideal as a general markup language, looking at HTML source doesn't give a clear picture of what the result is going to be unless you know HTML. This probably frightens off a lot of people.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
No, what I meant was... (3.00 / 1) (#89)
by fluffy grue on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 11:23:07 PM EST

I'm wary of any parsers which rely on cues.  What happens if you have _really_strong_underlines_?  It just ends up thunking a weirder, more arbitrary syntax on top of something which is well-formed.<P>

And yes, I agree, vocal emphasis is usually connoted by *s, but why not do it with <em> instead?  <P>

Eh, fuck it.  I'm sick of caring about what other people do with their HTML tags.  As long as I can do things right, why worry... meh.
--
"#kuro5hin [is like] a daycare center [where] the babysitter had been viciously murdered." -- CaptainObvious (we
[ Parent ]

request (none / 0) (#97)
by Cal Bunny on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 12:29:21 AM EST

Can I request | to be used to delimit TT blocks?

^cb^
[ Parent ]
I'm using the equal sign (=) (none / 0) (#99)
by Joe Groff on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 01:01:34 AM EST

Since that's what TWiki uses.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
Nearly WIKI formatting rules (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by reddirt on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:43:46 PM EST

Or at least a simplified subset of them.  Good job!

-- James
Wikiesque (none / 0) (#14)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:48:52 PM EST

It is rather wikiesque. They did have some good ideas with the whole wiki thing. ;-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
Great... (none / 0) (#19)
by Agent1 on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:13:16 PM EST

Now where's that light-mode thing for PDAs and such? ;)


-Agent1
"Thats the whole point of the internet, to slander people anonymously." - Anonymous
[ Parent ]
In the works (4.00 / 1) (#35)
by panner on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 06:19:14 PM EST

dram submitted a box that adds /mobile op which is stripped down and made for mobile devices. However, it needed a little more work, so he's still expanding it.

Not sure what the current status of that is, but it should be coming.



--
Keith Smiley
Get it right, for God's sake. Pigs can work out how to use a joysti
[ Parent ]
Wiki madness (none / 0) (#178)
by jacoplane on Tue May 28, 2002 at 08:57:39 PM EST

I think it's great they've used formating rules similar to wiki. Now if only there could be something like collaborative story editing. Scoop & wiki, now that's horny. damn i'm sounding too nerdy again...

[ Parent ]
ignore me please (4.50 / 2) (#15)
by ucblockhead on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 04:49:12 PM EST

This is an obsessive abuse of the system test.
  • Please ignore 1. it * ok?
  • Ok! [because http:/localhost] it will probably annoy] people if *it_*breaks***things__

-----------------------
This is k5. We're all tools - duxup
Oh, neat (none / 0) (#21)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:13:49 PM EST

It hadn't occurred to me to wonder if nesting the bold and italic codes would work right.

I guess it does. :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

It dosen't. (none / 0) (#55)
by vectro on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:19:25 PM EST

You get poorly-formed (the opposite of well-formed?) HTML, which some browsers happen to construe in the way you intended.

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]
Well (none / 0) (#80)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 10:23:10 PM EST

If it's poorly-formed, I believe that would be the fault of the authoer. You get what you put in, anyway. Garbage in, garbage out. :-)

If it's not difficult, maybe Joe can make it nest things smarter, to compensate for ignorance on the part of commenters like me.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

I don't know if it's worth the bother (none / 0) (#81)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 10:32:10 PM EST

After all, the normal HTML-Formatted posting mode lets you do stuff like that:

test test test

Most browsers interpret it properly despite not being valid, and it doesn't break anything.

Are you going to be back in #scoop later tonight? I've made some improvements to auto format on my test box that could use some testing :-)
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]

Poorly formed? (none / 0) (#104)
by vectro on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 02:25:08 AM EST

Given that there's no defintion of well-formedness for K5 formatting, I find it presumptuous of you to accuse this message of being poorly-formed.

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]
You, sir, are poorly formed! (none / 0) (#107)
by rusty on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 02:54:56 AM EST

And your father smelled of elderberries.

I don't really care how your comment is formed, truth be told. If it displays right, I'm all for it.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Testing. :) (4.50 / 2) (#18)
by aphrael on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:11:25 PM EST

Nothing to see here, please move along. It really isn't that interesting.
These are not the droids you are looking for. They're really over at http://www.boxofficemojo.com. Which is really a link from hell, didn't you know that?

Or am I just totally insane?

Poll options:

  1. foo
  2. bar
  3. goo
  • eep
  • meow
  • flibber
:)


Dynamic mode suggestions (5.00 / 1) (#25)
by tmoertel on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:35:31 PM EST

First, I love the dynamic modes. Great work, Joe. Of course, a good thing can always be made better. (You saw that coming, didn't you. ;-)

A couple of suggestions follow:

I wish that root-level comments in Dynamic Threaded mode could be collapsed. In other words, why shouldn't Dynamic Threaded mode act like Dynamic Minimal mode except that all of the root-level comments are already expanded upon page load?

I've noticed that dynamically loading a comment will erase the window's title (at least under Mozilla).

Finally, why not have a Collapse All link or button on dynamic pages? It sure would come in handy. Likewise, a Collapse Thread link or button on each thread would be great for quickly dismissing an expanded thread after reading its last comment.

Kudos to the Scoop developers, and keep up the good work!

--
My blog | LectroTest

[ Disagree? Reply. ]


Dynamic mode improvements (none / 0) (#36)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 06:21:09 PM EST

I wish that root-level comments in Dynamic Threaded mode could be collapsed. In other words, why shouldn't Dynamic Threaded mode act like Dynamic Minimal mode except that all of the root-level comments are already expanded upon page load?

Right now, the code for formatting dynamic minimal and dynamic threaded comments is just the same as normal threaded and minimal, except with the bulleted list of replies replaced with the dynamic collapse/expand control. The code makes some stupid (but simplifying) assumptions about things, and is only really designed to manipulate one comment at once. I'll be enhancing it a bit to support useful features like expanding/collapsing full threads, automatically expanding new comments, and improving comment rating so it works better in dynamic mode.

I've noticed that dynamically loading a comment will erase the window's title (at least under Mozilla).

I've never seen that happen. What version of Mozilla are you using?

Anyway, rest assured that dynamic comments will only get better in the future :-)
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]

Clarification: tab titles are lost (none / 0) (#42)
by tmoertel on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 07:18:03 PM EST

I've noticed that dynamically loading a comment will erase the window's title (at least under Mozilla).

I've never seen that happen. What version of Mozilla are you using?

When browsing in Moz's multi-tab mode, the tab title will change to "(Untitled)" when a comment is loaded. I'm running build 2002042608 (i.e., less than 72 hours old).

--
My blog | LectroTest

[ Disagree? Reply. ]


[ Parent ]
Hmm (none / 0) (#53)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:13:27 PM EST

I see that now. Mozilla's tab titles have always been finicky, though, so I'm not sure how to fix that.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
Tabs (none / 0) (#77)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 10:14:11 PM EST

Tabbed mode in Galeon 1.0 works right.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
Tabs in mozilla (none / 0) (#134)
by nutate on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 09:38:54 AM EST

This list of bugs may have the bug on it. If you use meta refresh, that could be it. I am inclined to think that this is just another mozilla problem with tabs (nowhere near as bad as the javascript close window closing the entire browser when in a tab) but kinda lame.

I like the dynamic threading, I hadn't tried it until just now, but it is really pretty neat.

I won't comment on the html autogen until it is fully XHTML 1.1 compatible. ;)

-Rich

[ Parent ]

Re: Mozilla and Title Bars (none / 0) (#43)
by Valdrax on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 07:21:43 PM EST

I don't see this issue.  I'm using Mozilla 0.9.9 for Mac OS X.  As the man said, what version are you using?

[ Parent ]
Testing Autoformat (none / 0) (#26)
by The Great Wakka on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:41:59 PM EST

* One * Two * Three 1. One 2. Two 3. Three This {should link to http://metafilter.com}.

Setting the mode (none / 0) (#33)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 06:14:15 PM EST

In between "Preview" and "Post", you have to actually set auto-format mode. You can also set it to be your default in your comment preferences.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
Another Test: Nested Links (5.00 / 4) (#27)
by crcarter on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:44:11 PM EST

Everything else seems to work, but what about [nested links http://www.rotten.com]

I guess not.  The question then becomes `*Why would anyone want to do that*'?

Oh, and it seems that quotes (of the `*back*` variety) break bolding, but what about `_italics_`?  'Forward' 'quotes' seem to work fine.  

Wow.  I'm way too easily amused.  This is cool.  Thanks!

Clayton, obsessive previewer

I'll need to fix that (4.00 / 1) (#31)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:59:52 PM EST

Backticks should probably be added to the list of quote characters. Thanks for pointing that out.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
Looks suspiciously close to TWiki syntax (5.00 / 1) (#30)
by artemb on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 05:59:33 PM EST

Look here - http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/TWiki/TWikiDocumentation#TWiki_Text_Formatting K5 could probably adopt some more features from there.

BTW, there's a bug in url detection in auto-format mode - it only takes anchor until the first underscore. Try http://foo.com#bar_baz - "_baz" will not be part of href...

P.S. Some say "plagiarism", I say "tradition". :-)

I didn't know about Wiki syntax when I wrote it (none / 0) (#32)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 06:03:32 PM EST

Honestly, I didn't know about that until people started pointing it out. Now that I've seen it, I might plagiarise a few more ideas from it :-)

And I'll add the underscore bug to my list of things to fix.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]

have a look at Structured Text while you are at it (none / 0) (#92)
by avdi on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 11:43:23 PM EST

Structured Text is a format that seems to have originated with Zope.  It owes a lot to the Wiki formats, and seems to be a particularly sensible and complete amalgam of them.  Also see John Weigley's interpretation of Wiki Markup.  In particular, see the convenient (and Emacs-friendly!) rules for footnotes; and the wonderfully simple table layout rules. Please don't copy WikiWiki markup directly though; I have no desire to format my K5 posts using dozens of consecutive single-quotes ;-)

--
Now leave us, and take your fish with you. - Faramir
[ Parent ]
See MeatBall:WikiSyntax (none / 0) (#118)
by Sunir on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 05:57:26 AM EST

MeatballWiki has been keeping a recount of syntax employed amongst the wikis. Or if it's missing something, if you ask, someone will know the answer--if there is one--and why it's good or bad. See WikiSyntax.

"Look! You're free! Go, and be free!" and everyone hated it for that. --r
[ Parent ]

Is auto-format the default for new users? (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by khym on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 06:15:59 PM EST

I know that the K5 audience tends to be technically inclined enough that they can handle a little HTML in their comments, but auto-formatting would be very good for non-technical users, and technical users would be able to find the right drop-down menu on the Comment Preferences page quickly enough.

--
Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
There should be a *help* link for auto-format, too (none / 0) (#145)
by sacrelicious on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 03:44:54 PM EST

Auto format would be nice if people knew how to use it. Even if we make the assumption that anyone reading this story already knows about auto-formatting, it will be nice for newbies and as a reference for non-newbies.

Also, any new features can be highlighted by updating the help page.
(hey, it's kinda like documenting your code!!)

one annoying thing is that you can't add a <p> at the end of your post by doing double-return. I want to provide adequate spacing from my .sig

[ Parent ]

Oh no! (5.00 / 1) (#146)
by QuickFox on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 04:42:06 PM EST

(hey, it's kinda like documenting your code!!)

Ufff, did you have to mention that? Now it's never gonna happen!
Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fish.<
[ Parent ]

Sig spacing (none / 0) (#147)
by QuickFox on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 04:51:35 PM EST

I want to provide adequate spacing from my .sig

Start your sig with a <br>.

Strangely, the behaviour seems erratic right now, sometimes I get extra spacing above the sig, sometimes not. Maybe they're testing something at this very moment.

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fi
[ Parent ]

I put in a help link and special page (none / 0) (#150)
by Joe Groff on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 05:32:13 PM EST

But panner took it out. Bug him about it :-)
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
Nice work (5.00 / 1) (#37)
by cione on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 06:22:42 PM EST

Posted my first comment using this and worked pretty good.

This is not meant to be rant but I would become a member if you give me another option to Paypal Paypal Paypal.

Sorry Rusty, But I would honest.
_________________________________________________
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. --Voltaire

I know (none / 0) (#38)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 06:30:28 PM EST

I know, I know. It's getting there. I beg your patience, and totally understand why many of you are not already subscribers. I wouldn't be either. Gimme a few more days... :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
In the meanwhile (none / 0) (#94)
by univgeek on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 11:56:03 PM EST

why not buy/sponsor an ad?

Arguing with an Electrical Engineer is liking wrestling with a pig in mud, after a while you realise the pig is enjoying it!
[ Parent ]
I'm an electrical Engineer [n/t] (none / 0) (#113)
by Hopfrog on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 05:39:28 AM EST



[ Parent ]
Great!! (none / 0) (#39)
by yicky yacky on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 06:39:16 PM EST

Shame you sort it all out after I've become fluent with html... ;D


Yicky Yacky
***********
"You f*cking newbie. Shut up and sit in the corner!" - JCB
Paragraph tags and break tags (5.00 / 3) (#40)
by QuickFox on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 06:51:31 PM EST

I have one pet peeve with the HTML markup on K5, and I notice that you're using the same markup in auto-format mode.

Here on K5 paragraphs are not surrounded by <p>paragraph tags</p>, instead they are <br><br>separated by double break tags.<br><br> Even if I use HTML Formatted mode and type paragraph tags, scoop replaces them with double break tags!

People say that in Braille and voice readers paragraph tags work much better. Break tags just indicate placement on the page, paragraph tags indicate paragraph boundaries.

I have no visual impairment so it's not a problem for me, and if nobody else has a problem with it maybe it doesn't matter. Or maybe people who have a problem with this just go away and you never get to hear about it. In any case, ignoring standards has a nasty tendency to come back and bite you some day. So while you're at it, maybe it's a good idea to use paragraph tags.

By the way, maybe some day people want scoop to comply with XHTML. In that case all tags and attributes should be lowercase and the break tag should be written as <br />.

In any case, this auto-format mode is superb, much appreciated, thanks Joe Groff!

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fis

Reason (5.00 / 1) (#41)
by rusty on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 06:57:37 PM EST

The reason for the <p> to <br> translation is actually to make K5 comment pages slightly more valid, according to html standards. No one closes their <p> tags (myself included) and that causes slews of validation errors.

I guess we could require closing </p> tags in html mode, and then translate the linebreaks to proper closed paragraphs. But then that brings in font formatting problems on some browsers.

Basically, the short descripton is that HTML itself is kind of in flux right now, and as soon as we have a proper CSS-only display mode (or modes), you can expect much greater standards-compliance. While we have to shoehorn all browsers into one interface, there will have to be crappy compromises like this. Give us some time to work on it. :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Speak for yourself (none / 0) (#46)
by sbutler on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 07:38:39 PM EST

I always close my paragraph tags



[ Parent ]
Amen (none / 0) (#51)
by mauftarkie on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:06:30 PM EST

I do, too. Always. And I hate it that what I type is changed by the code into something I didn't write.


--
Without you I'm one step closer to happiness without violence.
Without you I'm one step closer to innocence without consequence.


[ Parent ]
But maybe... (none / 0) (#131)
by Chancellor Martok on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 08:47:02 AM EST

Yes, well I do too... but then, maybe we're just extremely pedantic, or perhaps female. :)

-----
Chancellor Martok  in Sydney, Australia
"Castrate instead. That can surely rehabilitate. I did it volunatrily, and my grades went up!"  -- Sen

[ Parent ]
speaking as an html nazi (5.00 / 1) (#48)
by calimehtar on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 07:49:09 PM EST

I thing that an unclosed paragraph is preferable to <br>. Why? Simply because the p tag describes the content, while the br describes the layout.

+++

The whole point of the Doomsday Machine is lost if you keep it a secret.


[ Parent ]
HTML and layout (none / 0) (#59)
by ttfkam on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:39:41 PM EST

HTML can at best describe the structure of the page -- never the content.  <form>, <input>, <ol>, <ul>, <li>, <p>, and <table> (in limited circumstances) are about the only semantically valid elements in HTML and then only if used correctly.

XHTML is just a stopgap to sidestep the fact that HTML is downright hostile to document parsing and exchange.  There's a reason the Linux Documentation Project is converting to DocBook -- it's all about semantic meaning regardless of the layout or display engine.

Coupled with the fact that clean markup with CSS would reduce bandwidth usage on all but the most trivial of websites.  SVG anyone?

There are already too many Nazis in the world.  And being a HTML Nazi is to constantly battle with one's self.  Switch to XML, let the parser be the Nazi, and be happy.

If I'm made in God's image then God needs to lay off the corn chips and onion dip. Get some exercise, God! - Tatarigami
[ Parent ]

Lots of "semantically valid" elements (none / 0) (#177)
by bruckie on Mon May 27, 2002 at 06:15:51 PM EST

<form>, <input>, <ol>, <ul>, <li>, <p>, and <table> (in limited circumstances) are about the only semantically valid elements in HTML and then only if used correctly.

On the contrary, there are many "semantically valid" elements (assume that means the elements have some sort of well-defined meaning).

Examples (other than those you cited): em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kbd, var, cite, abbr, acronym, blockquote, q, dl, dt, dd.

There are many "meaningful" elements, but they're not commonly used.

--Bruce



[ Parent ]
Tricking the poor validator (5.00 / 1) (#50)
by QuickFox on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:03:21 PM EST

I wouldn't say it's "slightly more valid", you're just silencing the poor validator with foul trickery, replacing a rather minor error with a greater error that the validator can't detect.

Of course there are good reasons for working this way, often it's the only way to solve these things efficiently without drowning in details.

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fis
[ Parent ]

Drowning in details (5.00 / 1) (#60)
by ttfkam on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:42:13 PM EST

There is always the possibility of removing all markup from all comments.  But then again, that might require authors to be able to form complete thoughts effectively without resorting to visual tricks and hand-waving.

Maybe I'm expecting too much...

If I'm made in God's image then God needs to lay off the corn chips and onion dip. Get some exercise, God! - Tatarigami
[ Parent ]

Close those paragraphs (none / 0) (#105)
by Skwirl on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 02:36:26 AM EST

Wait, wouldn't it have been almost just as easy to insert those missing </p>'s instead of a bunch of <br><br>'s?

--
"Nothing in the world is more distasteful to a man than to take the path that leads to himself." -- Herman Hesse
[ Parent ]
No (none / 0) (#106)
by rusty on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 02:53:27 AM EST

With <br>'s, all I have to do is s/<p>/<br><br>/g. With closing /p's, I'd have to figure out where the end of the paragraph was etc.

Not to mention the problems that brings up with font stuff in some picky browsers.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

<p/> (none / 0) (#111)
by kraant on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 03:52:49 AM EST

HTML is one of those things I'm horribly out of sync with but wouldn't using replacing <p> with <p/> be just as valid as using <p> .... </p>?

Maybe more people would start using </p> if it was one of the allowed tags for that matter... :P
--
"kraant, open source guru" -- tumeric
Never In Our Names...
[ Parent ]

No, that's not what it means (none / 0) (#114)
by QuickFox on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 05:40:49 AM EST

No, the closing /> is allowed only when there isn't any content. The notation <p /> would indicate an empty paragraph, like <p><p/>. I don't think <p /> is a legal notation for an empty paragraph but that's the logical meaning.

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fis
[ Parent ]

Keyword: Almost (none / 0) (#115)
by Skwirl on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 05:41:55 AM EST

I have this illness that originates from learning to code in BASIC that makes it so I'd rather write my own parser than recall how to use regular expressions or lookup certain functions.

So, I was thinking of a finite state machine that would iterate through the tags thusly:

  • State 0: If it's a <p> tag, then state++;
  • State 1:
    • If it's another <p> tag, then insert a </p> tag in front of it; state=1;
    • If it's a </p> tag: state=0;
    • If EOF, then append a </p> tag.
Your version results in cleaner Perl code. My version results in cleaner (but less compatable) HTML code. You win. I'm just replying here to prove I'm not some n00b luser.

--
"Nothing in the world is more distasteful to a man than to take the path that leads to himself." -- Herman Hesse
[ Parent ]
Hehe - not a n00b luser (none / 0) (#123)
by gazbo on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 06:30:18 AM EST

Your [regexp] version results in cleaner Perl code

There speaks a man who's not seen a Perl regexp for a while...

Seriously, I don't see the obsession with regexps in Perl. They serve a very useful purpose, but for a large number of tasks it is cleaner and much more efficient to write a proper parser. Regexp solutions to parser problems are usually unmaintainable hacks to save 10 minutes of coding.


-----
Topless, revealing, nude pics and vids of Zora Suleman! Upskirt and down blouse! Cleavage!
Hardcore ZORA SULEMAN pics!

[ Parent ]

ahh, but... (none / 0) (#133)
by pb on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 09:11:22 AM EST

Regexps are great for building parsers as well. I use them to do most of my tokenizing in my HTML parser.  When the regexp can't do it, I write code, but there isn't that much code.  :)

(using PHP and preg_split)

P.S. I love autoformat!
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]

Not necessarily (none / 0) (#143)
by Joe Groff on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 02:38:51 PM EST

The perl interpreter is slow; the regex handler is fast. Implementing a parsing loop in Perl is guaranteed to be five or six times slower than just using a regular expression. While I agree regexes are hackish, they're unfortunately central to perl's design.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
Forgot a few cases :) (none / 0) (#153)
by Smiling Dragon on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 07:55:40 PM EST

What about nested paragraphs?
I'd guess you'd need to go state=state-1 rather than state=0.

Avoid having comments that don't start with an open p ending with a close p by:
if (EOF and state>0) then insert /p

<grin>

-- Sometimes understanding is the booby prize - Neal Stephenson
[ Parent ]

Hmm... (none / 0) (#156)
by Skwirl on Wed May 01, 2002 at 06:40:50 AM EST

Are nested paragraphs even kosher? I can't think of any reason why a weblog comment would need to do that, so the most elegant solution would be to remove any extraneous closing tags. I'll leave that alteration as an exercise for the reader. (Hint: It goes in State 0.)

I believe the second case you cite is already taken care of. If there's no first <p> tag, then you never get into state 1, where the EOF if-then line is.

--
"Nothing in the world is more distasteful to a man than to take the path that leads to himself." -- Herman Hesse
[ Parent ]

I don't think so (none / 0) (#160)
by rusty on Wed May 01, 2002 at 02:12:39 PM EST

I don't think you're supposed to nest paragraphs anyway. I don't know if there a rule against it, but it doesn't seem like a particularly useful thing to do.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
On nesting paragraphs... (none / 0) (#161)
by Smiling Dragon on Wed May 01, 2002 at 07:42:47 PM EST

Wups, you're dead right on the second bit.  Not pay attention to the scope :)

As for nested paragraphs, I tend to use them when I need to paragraph up a blockquote inside a paragraph.  I don't think it's appropriate to just close the first open and start a second as you're then mucking with the structure.  Sort of like doing the 'Open Bold - Open Anchor - Close Bold - Close Anchor' thing.

Compare with TeX, where you have sections, subsections and subsubsections.  I can't think of anything similar in HTML so I use nested paragraphs.

As it happens, the odds of a comment becoming complex enough that it might need something like that is teeny, as are the odds of coming back to edit it ages later and needing some metadata about the document structure, but I don't reckon that's really the point :)

I expect with some Hx tags and plenty of BRs one could dispense with the nesting but I tend to use P tags as a way to identify a block of text and flank it with blank lines.

 
-- Sometimes understanding is the booby prize - Neal Stephenson
[ Parent ]

Nested paragraphs (none / 0) (#176)
by Just Swing It on Mon May 20, 2002 at 05:50:54 PM EST

Well, by that engine, it would see the nested <p> tag as a second paragraph and put a </p> before it. I like <div> and </div> tags if I want to delimit sections that badly. <span> and </span> are good if the text you want to delimit is already inside a single paragraph, because the HTML spec doesn't ask UAs to break lines: it's more of an inline element than a block element. I usually, however, just use LaTeX when I have a large, sectioned source document. <div> and <span> tags are great for sectioning because the HTML spec requires them to be closed: <div><div> will cause no ambiguity (as long as it's properly closed).


1/((sin x)^2*cos x) - (cos x) / (sin x)^2
[ Parent ]
the answer is sec(x) (none / 0) (#179)
by eviltwinimposter on Sun Jun 02, 2002 at 01:38:05 PM EST


"Bought Big Lizard only a dollar fifty / Well, that's pretty neat / Yeah, it's fuckin' nifty / But I just can't afford to feed it. / And you should see the way it shits.." -- Dead Milkmen
[ Parent ]
Closing <P> tag optional? (none / 0) (#130)
by SoupIsGoodFood on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 08:43:13 AM EST

Aren't </P> tags optional? I'm pretty sure I can remember the HTML 4.01 spec saying that they where optional. Because before that. I used to think that they were mandatory.

[ Parent ]
Indeed it's optional... (none / 0) (#132)
by Chancellor Martok on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 08:55:01 AM EST

A quick look through w3.org turned up this regarding <p> tags:

Start tag: required, End tag: optional

(see http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text.html#h-9.3.1)

-----
Chancellor Martok  in Sydney, Australia
"Castrate instead. That can surely rehabilitate. I did it volunatrily, and my grades went up!"  -- Sen

[ Parent ]

XHTML (4.00 / 1) (#138)
by jsoderba on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 12:20:41 PM EST

But we're all using (or at least preparing to use) XHTML now like good little HTML Nazis, aren't we1. There are no optional closing tags in XHTML.

1I

[ Parent ]

<P />? n/t (none / 0) (#152)
by SoupIsGoodFood on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 07:16:09 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Damn <p> tags... (none / 0) (#157)
by Chancellor Martok on Wed May 01, 2002 at 09:40:20 AM EST

<p /> is the equivalent of <p></p>, so doesn't really have any use in this case. <p></p>s shouldn't even be used anyway, according to the W3C specs, which goes as far as to discourage browsers from rendering it.

As for XHTML compliance, I always close my <p> tags anyway...

-----
Chancellor Martok  in Sydney, Australia
"Castrate instead. That can surely rehabilitate. I did it volunatrily, and my grades went up!"  -- Sen

[ Parent ]

It doesn't work in Opera (none / 0) (#58)
by John Milton on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:35:09 PM EST

I don't really care since I use nested, but this doesn't work in Opera with javascript enabled. Opera has pretty standard javascript, but occasionally it bumps up against something very IE specific.


"When we consider that woman are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should Treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit." -Elizabeth Cady Stanton


Opera doesn't support DHTML (5.00 / 2) (#67)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:49:49 PM EST

It has no support for changing the document presentation at runtime, whether by DOM or innerHTML. I hear support is being added to Opera 6, but until it's completed there's nothing I can do to make it work in Opera.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
opera and dhtml (none / 0) (#159)
by butterfly on Wed May 01, 2002 at 12:22:02 PM EST

actually, opera has had support for DHTML since version 4, it just doesn't support dynamically writing to spans/divs/etc, or adding and removing nodes from the DOM. (ie: i know what you mean, but i'm just nitpicking because i'm shamelessly partisan towards opera 6, heh). i just had to write some code for cross-browser dynamic writing, so i appreciate the many headaches involved, trust me!

hopefully the next release of opera will add this, and we can all sleep easy at night... well, once somebody writes a netscape4-deleting-virus that spreads through outlook. (somebody do it, for the love of god... please?!)

examples of opera DHTML


"an eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind"

[ Parent ]
You mean page reflow. (none / 0) (#162)
by static on Wed May 01, 2002 at 08:46:37 PM EST

The Opera developers know about this; it gets requested fairly regularly on their newsgroups! :-) Page Reflow is a fairly crucial piece of DHTML. Opera's rendering engine is being rewritten to support it via DOM.

Wade.

[ Parent ]

Why doesn't dynamic mode work in Lynx? (none / 0) (#76)
by CaptainSuperBoy on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 09:29:35 PM EST

<grin>

But seriously, folks... dynamic mode is simply the best interface I've seen for reading comments online.  And I've been reading comments since I called BBSes on my Apple IIe.  As they say in games, GJ.

--
jimmysquid.com - I take pictures.

Does it work for stories? (5.00 / 1) (#86)
by delmoi on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 11:11:55 PM EST

Can you post stories using auto-format? It might give me a reason to actualy upgrade the scoop install on lit.hatori42.com :P
--
"'argumentation' is not a word, idiot." -- thelizman
Yes it does. (none / 0) (#87)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 11:21:02 PM EST

That was half the point. :-)
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
Dynamic threaded mode in Konqueror 2.2.2 (none / 0) (#88)
by sk0tadi on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 11:23:04 PM EST

After expanding a comment in dynamic threaded mode in Konqueror 2.2.2, every letter in the comment shows up on its own line. Happens 70% of the time. Works fine in Mozilla 1.0rc1

Konqueror's a bit flaky (none / 0) (#90)
by Joe Groff on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 11:26:50 PM EST

I noticed this behaviour sporadically as well, and don't know how to work around it, besides maybe upgrading to a later 2.2.x version of Konqueror. 3.x doesn't seem to work at all, though.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
Hmm (4.66 / 3) (#95)
by DJBongHit on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 12:05:51 AM EST

Could we, perhaps, have an "only show threads with new comments" display mode?

~DJBongHit

--
GNU GPL: Free as in herpes.

me too n/t (3.00 / 1) (#119)
by jcolter on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 06:04:27 AM EST



[ Parent ]
Refined sensibilities (none / 0) (#96)
by QuickFox on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 12:15:40 AM EST

Auto-format turns bare URLs into links. This may create certain difficulties for those of us who have good taste and carefully refined sensibilities. We cannot just mention an URL without making it clickable, as may be desirable if for some reason we need to mention an URL such as http://www.goatse.cx (newbies beware: please do not click on that link, because the site is not tasteful).

Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fis

You got it (none / 0) (#101)
by rusty on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 01:59:40 AM EST

Backslashes now escape special formatting characters in general, including urls. So "\http://www.disney.com/" will now produce an unlinked offensive URL, like http://www.disney.com/.

Incidentally, literal backslashes are, of course, made by backslash-escaping a backslash.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Euro (4.00 / 1) (#120)
by hulver on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 06:24:42 AM EST

This is the Euro symbol. HTML Formatted.

--
HuSi!
Euro (5.00 / 1) (#121)
by hulver on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 06:25:30 AM EST

This is the � Euro symbol. Auto Format.

--
HuSi!
[ Parent ]
Bizare (4.00 / 1) (#122)
by hulver on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 06:26:23 AM EST

Looks like a bug in Auto Format for comments. Does something weird to .

--
HuSi!
[ Parent ]
Bug Report (4.00 / 1) (#124)
by codemonkey_uk on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 06:40:50 AM EST

In HTML formatted mode, writting &amp; in order to get & (the HTML entity for &) breaks when you preview, as it collapses your mark up, and what you type does not survive the round trip to the server.

Same applies to &gt; and &lt;

The only safe way to post anything code like to scoop is to type, copy to a buffer, preview, paste back into the textarea, then post. Which sucks ass.
---
Thad
"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there is no good evidence either way." - Bertrand Russell

Used to work (none / 0) (#125)
by hulver on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 06:44:59 AM EST

Well &amp; has never worked, but < &lt; > &gt; always used to.

Nope. Not haveing a problem with &lt; and &gt;. But &amp; dosn't work. Preview changes it to &

--
HuSi!
[ Parent ]

Yes, well, kindof (none / 0) (#126)
by codemonkey_uk on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 07:38:35 AM EST

&amp;gt; becomes &gt; becomes >
Like so:
&gt; becomes > becomes >
Like so:
> becomes > becomes >
---
Thad
"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there is no good evidence either way." - Bertrand Russell
[ Parent ]
My point is... (none / 0) (#127)
by codemonkey_uk on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 07:40:44 AM EST

Preview is not preview. Preview is "show me what my post would have looked like had I posted it now, rather than previewing it".

And a bug having "always" existed, does not excuse it. Grumble.
---
Thad
"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there is no good evidence either way." - Bertrand Russell
[ Parent ]

Yes, I know (none / 0) (#128)
by hulver on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 07:44:07 AM EST

Things have not changed though. & has never worked. I got worried, because I thought &lt; and &gt; had been broken as well.

--
HuSi!
[ Parent ]
Hmm (none / 0) (#139)
by rusty on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 12:22:29 PM EST

Let's see...

Yep, it appears that &amp; gets collapsed on preview to &. We'll have to fix that.

&lt; and &gt; work normally, as, I believe, do the other entities. I'm not sure how collapsing ampersands would affect code posting...

Also, plain text mode has been fixed to preserve indentation, so code should be eminently postable, in plain-text posting mode.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Yay! (none / 0) (#136)
by fortytwo on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 11:53:51 AM EST

It works with konqueror 3 now!

2 problems (4.00 / 1) (#140)
by Hopfrog on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 12:27:11 PM EST

� (u umlaut), � (o umlaut) etc do not work with auto format.


Ack! (none / 0) (#144)
by Joe Groff on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 02:42:56 PM EST

I forgot to put parentheses around a regex element for handling high-bit characters like your umlauts or the euro sign below. It's a one-line fix, and should hopefully be in soon :-) Sorry!
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
Techincally... (none / 0) (#148)
by Inoshiro on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 05:12:12 PM EST

/word/ should be italic and _word_ should be <u>underline</u>, rusty. But it looks like we don't support underlining in the white list :p



--
[ イノシロ ]
Actually... (none / 0) (#175)
by farrago on Thu May 16, 2002 at 04:04:07 AM EST

I believe that Rusty as actually got it right. I seem to remember reading somewhere that underline came about because old manual typewriters were not able to create italics. So when italics were needed, the typist would go back and underline the section that should be in italics.

In fact, have a look at this link where they explain it better than I do :)

[ Parent ]

Link syntax is BACKWARD (none / 0) (#149)
by pin0cchio on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 05:17:47 PM EST

Your current wiki-ish markup seems quite odd in that it breaks many of the conventions of existing Web markup languages. For instance, in Everything2 markup, Wikipedia markup, and HTML, the link target comes before the text of the link. In addition, there seems to be no way to do nested lists. And how do you start a line with a bold word without it being a UL item?

I'd suggest scrapping the current autoformat code and just making a Perl version of the Wikipedia PHP script's formatter, with which many of us are already familiar thanks in part to these K5 articles.



It wasn't designed to mimic Wiki (none / 0) (#151)
by Joe Groff on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 05:42:00 PM EST

I wrote it to provide a simple, more intuitive markup for people who don't like HTML. The Wiki similarities are completely accidental. And nested lists are coming.
--
How long must I travel on
to be just where you are?

[ Parent ]
No need to rewrite the Wikipedia parser (none / 0) (#171)
by StephenGilbert on Sun May 05, 2002 at 12:38:07 AM EST

It's simply a PHP clone (with some Wikipedia-specific enhancements) of the UseModWiki (http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl) parser, which was written in Perl.

--------------------------------
Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia
[ Parent ]

Long URL Bug (none / 0) (#155)
by Captain Derivative on Wed May 01, 2002 at 01:34:42 AM EST

Auto-format breaks long URLs in links; for some reason it puts a space in the middle.

For example, if I try:

[url text http://fceultra.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DC ForumID6&conf=conference]

I end up with:

[url text http://fceultra.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DC ForumID6&conf=conference]

There should be no space in the middle of the URL in either case.  I could see why Scoop might want to put whitespace in when it's displaying the URL itself, but there's no reason for it when you supply text to display for the link.

--
Hey! Why aren't you all dead yet?! Oh, that's right, it's only Tuesday. -- Zorak


Broken link (3.00 / 1) (#164)
by spiralx on Thu May 02, 2002 at 12:38:21 PM EST

In this comment here.

You're doomed, I'm doomed, we're all doomed for ice cream. - Bob Aboey

Yeah (none / 0) (#165)
by rusty on Thu May 02, 2002 at 03:10:45 PM EST

Joe's working on that problem.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
Extreme italicism (none / 0) (#167)
by awgsilyari on Fri May 03, 2002 at 01:33:46 PM EST

I started noticing this after you introduced dynamic mode, but I don't know if it's related:

Every so often when viewing "My Comments" the entire page comes up in italics. Punching "reload" fixes the problem.

Has anyone else noticed this?

--------
Please direct SPAM to john@neuralnw.com

What browser? (none / 0) (#168)
by rusty on Fri May 03, 2002 at 01:48:27 PM EST

This italics thing happens to me in Galeon on linux, but it's the browser. selecting and unselecting text fixes it. Are you sure it's actually the html that's italicised?

What browser/platform?

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Opera (none / 0) (#169)
by awgsilyari on Fri May 03, 2002 at 01:51:51 PM EST

It's Opera 6.0 B1, Linux, statically linked.

The next time it occurs, I will try what you mentioned.

[n/t] I chose static Opera because I figured it would start up faster. Qt takes so freaking long to dynamically link. In reality it made no difference, and I have an enormous executable now ;)

--------
Please direct SPAM to john@neuralnw.com
[ Parent ]

Cool (none / 0) (#172)
by sypher on Sun May 05, 2002 at 08:01:39 PM EST

This is cool. its about time k5 took a lead. more stories is perhaps the next step. Form handling is still fscked under IE 5.5 as well. (go see spiderman) Syph

I dreamt of it once, now I fear it dreams of me
OT: Dynamic Display and Comments (none / 0) (#173)
by natael on Mon May 06, 2002 at 06:08:48 PM EST

This isn't directly related to anything in the news update, but I figured it would more likely to be seen by one of the scoop developers.

Ever since the dynamic display option was introduced, a blank line will seperate a parent message from its replies.  I'm not sure if this was an intentional change or a bug, but it really bothers me when browsing a story.  Before, all the comments would be grouped together, but with the extra white-space now it is easy to lose track of threads.

Can anyone tell me if this was changed on purpose?   Maybe the html was just changed and my browser renders it differently?

"And now you're apologizing, not for insulting and denigrating people you don't

request for autoformat: mdash (5.00 / 2) (#174)
by infinitera on Tue May 07, 2002 at 06:36:33 PM EST

-- —? Anyone else think that would be useful?

Story Formatting, Auto-format, and more Dynamic Mode Updates | 179 comments (179 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!