The BBS FAQ has been updated to reflect a few new UBBCode changes. Right now, only the english version has been changed, I'll try to translate the other popular languages here shortly. New quote styles are the main addition, and blockquote tags.

The BBS FAQ has been updated to reflect a few new UBBCode changes. Right now, only the english version has been changed, I'll try to translate the other popular languages here shortly. New quote styles are the main addition, and blockquote tags.

Sweet! Now I don't have to type in [orange][i] ... [/i][/orange] every time I want to quote someone!

Now can we just get an auto-quote button that pastes in the previous user's text? Which we will ,of course, edit down for brevity...

Now can we just get an auto-quote button that pastes in the previous user's text? Which we will ,of course, edit down for brevity...

That will come with the upgrade to 6.2. I'm skipping 6.0 and 6.1 due to some annoyning new features that didn't have an off switch. Hopefully 6.2 will be running this board in the next month or so.

Tom, there's a typo in the FAQ for quoting the fourth person. It uses the [q1][/q1] tag again.

Which we will ,of course, edit down for brevity...

How long before people get lazy...

How long before people get lazy...

Oh, folks will get lazy right away. I think auto-quotes should be off by default, and people should have to jump through hoops to turn it on. Let's hope the new code lets us do that.

One thing I hate about other BBS's is lots of useless replies which quote huge sections of the original text. It's like Usenet all over again. Ick.

New quote styles are the main addition, and blockquote tags.

Not my style, but I'll get used to the convenience. Now all we need is a sarcastic smiley and I'll be all set.

Oh, folks will get lazy right away. I think auto-quotes should be off by default, and people should have to jump through hoops to turn it on.

Bah, we should have the ability to vote away other people's ability to use the feature

YES! finally!

*dances a jig*

it's the small things in life. I was just thinking about this last night. Thanks for keeping this BBS up to snuff Tom!

The BBS FAQ has been updated to reflect a few new UBBCode changes. Right now, only the english version has been changed, I'll try to translate the other popular languages here shortly. New quote styles are the main addition, and blockquote tags.

---
Drakino

The BBS FAQ has been updated to reflect a few new UBBCode changes. Right now, only the english version has been changed, I'll try to translate the other popular languages here shortly. New quote styles are the main addition, and blockquote tags.

Sweet! Now I don't have to type in [orange][i] ... [/i][/orange] every time I want to quote someone!

Now can we just get an auto-quote button that pastes in the previous user's text? Which we will ,of course, edit down for brevity...

-Tony <tonycpsu(at)yahoo(dot)com>
MkII #554, MkIIa #2680

Now can we just get an auto-quote button that pastes in the previous user's text? Which we will ,of course, edit down for brevity...

That will come with the upgrade to 6.2. I'm skipping 6.0 and 6.1 due to some annoyning new features that didn't have an off switch. Hopefully 6.2 will be running this board in the next month or so.

---
Drakino



Tom, there's a typo in the FAQ for quoting the fourth person. It uses the [q1][/q1] tag again.



Which we will ,of course, edit down for brevity...

How long before people get lazy...

Sure, Fine, Whatever. - Dana Scully



How long before people get lazy...
Oh, folks will get lazy right away. I think auto-quotes should be off by default, and people should have to jump through hoops to turn it on. Let's hope the new code lets us do that.

One thing I hate about other BBS's is lots of useless replies which quote huge sections of the original text. It's like Usenet all over again. Ick.

___________
Tony Fabris



New quote styles are the main addition, and blockquote tags.
Not my style, but I'll get used to the convenience. Now all we need is a sarcastic smiley and I'll be all set.

-Rob Riccardelli
60GB MK2 090000736



Oh, folks will get lazy right away. I think auto-quotes should be off by default, and people should have to jump through hoops to turn it on.

Bah, we should have the ability to vote away other people's ability to use the feature

Me too!

Motion to suspend Bitt's title of "Grammar Police" in lieu of the more appopriate title of "Smart Ass."

I wasn't aware there was a difference.

Rob... I'm updating your Rolleye GIF with one that's a smaller file size and doesn't have the gray anti-aliased edges.

In case Tom wants to use it...

Nice!

I wasn't aware there was a difference.

Touché!

Now can we just get an auto-quote button that pastes in the previous user's text?

I'd be happy with a button that just put the q .. /q around the current selection. On modern browsers you can do that in Javascript (here -- skip all the people telling him it can't be done and scroll down to the last person, who tells him how to do it) without hacking UBBThreads itself at all.

Peter

And how much extra work did you have to do to get all that? Being a smartass is a lot of work, isn't it?

I'm sort of amused that the commentary on the BBS FAQ isn't from newbies. Everyone has a non-default color except for meatballman and I.

Sweet! Now I don't have to type in ... every time I want to quote someone!

Ha! I have that function programmed into my Gateway Anykey keyboard -- one keystroke does it all!

tanstaafl.

Say.. is there anything you can do about the tags getting mangled when EDITing a posting? In particular the [image] tags?

Thanks!

In particular the [image] tags?

What gets mangled? In theory it should be fixable pretty easially. One of the minor tweaks I want to fix is the URL issue for e-mail addresses.

Basic concept on how the backend works. The BBS takes your post, and neuters any HTML code. Then it converts the UBB code to HTML, and tosses it in the database. When you edit, the BBS goes through, returns the HTML code to UBB, and in theory everything is back to the way it was when you had it in the edit box the first time.

One important thing is the order. One of the bugs I created today was that when editing a post that used [q], it would have an [i] surrounded by HTML. The other issue is similar commands. If you look at the HTML source for the [q1] [q2] and [q3] tags, they all use slightly different capitalized tags to avoid confusing the back end.

The last issue that I can think of that is fixable in a method similar to the above is the [pre] and [code] tags. Right now, the code does a match on either one, but uses the same HTML code. Converting it back results in the [pre] tag every time.

Slightly related note... PRE tags are a little screwy on the BBS. When you use a PRE /PRE block, the next paragraph after the closing /PRE tag doesn't word wrap. In fact, it just kinda goes off the side of the screen, and you can't read it. I don't want to demonstrate it in this thread because it makes the thread look really ugly, but try it in a test thread or something. The workaround I use when I post code or want preformatted text is to put a period on a line of its own underneath the PRE /PRE block. But I've seen people who aren't aware of this bug and the paragraph after the pre-formatted block gets mangled.

Just FYI while we're tweaking the BBS.

Just try posting something with an image tag in it, and then go back and edit the post.. the html around the image tag gets left in and then mangled..

Cheers

Yeah, Tom, Mark's description is accurate. When you use the IMAGE tag, re-editing the post after-the-fact results in the HTML <image> command being there instead of the UBB tag. I've had this happen, too. Seems like the very same thing you were fixing in the Q tags as you were developing them this morning.

When you use a PRE /PRE block, the next paragraph after the closing /PRE tag doesn't word wrap. In fact, it just kinda goes off the side of the screen, and you can't read it.

I've seen this, too. Dunno if it's an HTML/Browser problem or if it's in the UBB code somewhere. It'd be helpful if you could point us to a thread where it's happened, so that we could look at the rendered HTML and see where the problem is, exactly.

What I'd like to see is:

If someone posts a wide PRE block or a large image file, the entire thread widens to the width of that block or image. I wish the cells in the table that make up the thread could have independent widths so that one wide post didn't screw up the rest of the thread. This is a tough one, though, because I've struggled with the <table> tag before and it's no easy task to get something that works on all browsers in all situations.

One of the minor tweaks I want to fix is the URL issue for e-mail addresses.

While you're at it, maybe you could also get it to accept &entity; style HTML character entities. That way I can use &ldquo; and &rdquo; and stop annoying Peter with ``s and ''s.

If someone posts a wide PRE block or a large image file, the entire thread widens to the width of that block or image. I wish the cells in the table that make up the thread could have independent widths so that one wide post didn't screw up the rest of the thread.

Sounds like you read in flat mode, like me. The way to fix the wide post problem is to make each post its own table rather than its own row. Some message boards do this, but I can't recall off-hand where I've seen it like that.

Everyone has a non-default color except for meatballman and I.

surely you meant "Meatballman and me"?

--dan.

I realize that I'm a bit new here, but I'd like to offer my opinion, if I may?

I don't know much about bbs boards, and my experience with them in the past has been mainly vBulletin boards. That being said, I like the vBulletin option of replying to the general thread rather than to an exclusive post. I also like the way that quotes are tagged, with credit to the quoter above the quote area (see example below).

I always hated the concept of replying to a thread. I'm not replying to a thread -- I'm replying to a post. If you want to comment on the original post, then reply to that.