Feature request in regard to phpBB tags...

[D. V. Devnull]

Hello again... :anxious:

 

 

 

(Please, whatever you do, don't just lock this due to my stupidity earlier in the week! :ohnoes: ...)

 

 

 

Didn't have this hit me until I was trying to post something that needed this rather nifty feature this morning, but I would like to ask for a slightly different parsing method for some of the phpBB tags currently being used on Tip.It.

 

 

 

I would like to ask that for any tag that uses options like a URL or just some text, that it be required that there are the double-quotes after the equal sign within the opening tag, and that single quotes be allowed for such things as when someone is talking about an item belonging to someone within those double quotes.

 

 

 

(Note: I may sound really negative while typing out the rest of this. This is not my intent, and I seriously apologize for how it sounds. :( ...)

 

 

 

Here's an example of code that doesn't fully work... I've used http://www.tip.it as my example choice for a URL...

 

[hide="Someone's item..."]
[quote name="Someone's thought"]Example Text[/quote]

Example text

[url="http://www.tip.it"]http://www.tip.it[/url][/hide]

 

 

 

When used with the quotes, like so, we get this right now...

 

=============Begin Example=============

 

[hide=Someone's item...]

Example Text

 

Example text

 

http://www.tip.it[/hide]

 

=============End Example...=============

 

 

 

As you can see, the quote works, but the url and hide doesn't work. But if the double-quotes are removed...

 

=============Begin Example=============

 

[hide=Someone's item...]

Example Text

 

Example text

 

http://www.tip.it[/hide]

 

=============End Example...=============

 

 

 

The URL now works, but the quote and hide doesn't... and the syntax gets confusing... Hmm, I'll remove that single quote and talk improperly by accident...

 

=============Begin Example=============

 

[hide=Someones item...]

Example Text

 

Example text

 

http://www.tip.it[/hide]

 

=============End Example...=============

 

 

 

The URL and hide work, but the Quote fails now.

 

 

 

(End section with accidental negativity here... I think... :anxious: ...)

 

 

 

Put simply, my point is that it really would be better overall, both for coders and normal users alike, if a better parsing system was put into place to allow single-quotes and double-quotes to be used to properly display an item.

 

 

 

BTW, I'm very much willing to wait however massively long it takes for something like this to go through and happen. I'd just like to avoid future messes on posts. :D

 

 

 

So, Opinions? Thoughts? Discussion, please? :

 

 

 

~Mr. D. V. Devnull

[eyehawk78]

Whats wrong with your postcount now? JOKES :P

 

 

 

Seriously though, I think people who have got used to the current method would be pissed off if it got changed, which would make up more people that would benefit from this change.

 

 

 

Plus the only bbcode that uses speech marks is the Quote tag, so if anything that is the only one which would require changing. So that it does not include speech marks.

[____]

Whats wrong with your postcount now? JOKES :P

 

 

 

Seriously though, I think people who have got used to the current method would be pissed off if it got changed, which would make up more people that would benefit from this change.

 

 

 

Plus the only bbcode that uses speech marks is the Quote tag, so if anything that is the only one which would require changing. So that it does not include speech marks.

Then dont forget the massive preg replace you'll have to do the convery all existing quote tags to they no longer have the quotation marks in them... otherwise there's going to be a [cabbage] load of borken quotes, and if you mess up the preg replace, you'll still got broken quotes in some form.

[D. V. Devnull]

Before I start, I should note that I've intentionally ignored all the non-relevant parts of the person's post. Now, onto the good stuff.........

 

Seriously though, I think people who have got used to the current method would be pissed off if it got changed, which would make up more people that would benefit from this change.

 

 

 

Plus the only bbcode that uses speech marks is the Quote tag, so if anything that is the only one which would require changing. So that it does not include speech marks.

 

I was thinking quite the opposite, and to have the requirement of double-quote encapsulation around any special attributes, so that phrases like "Someone's Item" (or as in a URL, "Someone's%20Item" ...) could be typed properly with the single-quote mark to show the proper possessive, instead of it flat shattering the whole thing, which really disservices a lot of people.

 

 

 

As a case in point, imagine if I were trying to (Which I really was earlier this morning!) type something like "Screenshot of D_V_Devnull's FireFox Browser Layout". Notice the single quote. While trying to post, I suddenly discovered that it flat wouldn't accept this, with or without double-quotes attempted. I eventually ended up going with "Screenshot of FireFox Browser used by D_V_Devnull...", which really was overly circular and roundaboutish, and used more words than necessary.

 

 

 

This reminded me just how much the average forum-reading user does not like having to read so much or have to find a roundabout way to mark something. And that's basically how this thread got started. (Other than the fact that I was feeling a little crazy about not being able to use the possessive forms of marking items, anyway.)

 

 

 

Any questions, eyehawk78? :-s

 

 

 

~Mr. Devnull

[eyehawk78]

Yes actually, can you not take a joke? It was only a bit of light hearted micky taking in the first line of my first post. #-o Surely your able to laugh at yourself about it?

[D. V. Devnull]

So off-topic, but begging a reply...

 

Yes actually, can you not take a joke? It was only a bit of light hearted micky taking in the first line of my first post. #-o Surely your able to laugh at yourself about it?

 

Yes, I can take a joke. LOL :lol: ... I laughed for about 10 seconds, then just dug into replying to the rest of your post. I figured it wouldn't do me well to dwell on my stupidities. :mrgreen:

 

 

 

~Mr. Devnull

[mchainmail]

I don't think this has been brought up before, however, like most forum-related things, I don't think tip.it won't do anything until phpBB 3.0 comes out (which should be in a couple months)

[Albosky]

Quote is the ONLY BBcode that requires the " , always has.

 

 

 

 

 

Talk to the phpBB group if you want it changed , because for the exact reason darkrick stated, I'm not going to run a query to check and fix all 2.6 million of the other posts on this forum, just because you didn't properly read the BBCode FAQ that is linked every time you make a post.

[azntemplar_00]

We've survived this long with the 'problem'. I think we can hold...out...just....a....little...bit...lon-

[D. V. Devnull]

Quote is the ONLY BBcode that requires the " , always has.

 

 

 

Talk to the phpBB group if you want it changed , because for the exact reason darkrick stated, I'm not going to run a query to check and fix all 2.6 million of the other posts on this forum, just because you didn't properly read the BBCode FAQ that is linked every time you make a post.

 

Heh, that link is so small that I missed it, and ended up spending about 30 minutes digging around for your announcement thread as to usage. :anxious: (I know, idiotic/lame/stupid, huh? :( ...) Anywho, talking to phpBB group sounds like an idea I may have to go follow. :-k

 

 

 

 

 

We've survived this long with the 'problem'. I think we can hold...out...just....a....little...bit...lon-

 

A little bit longer? Yeah, that's why I was saying I didn't mind how long it took, even if it was the next phpBB version, just as long as it didn't cause any stress to the person I'm quoting just above you, Albosky. Maybe phpBB group can provide clean-up services to those who have modded their stuff a lot. :-s

 

 

 

 

 

~Mr. Devnull

[Guest]

Can we have a D V Devnull subforum for Forums Updates and Suggestions? Seriously, so we can ignore all the insignificant pointless threads.

[D. V. Devnull]

Off-Topic:

 

Can we have a D V Devnull subforum for Forums Updates and Suggestions? Seriously, so we can ignore all the insignificant pointless threads.

 

My new text line below my stat sig is in direct regard to you and one other person who seem bent on insultive behavior. Learn it, and thanks in advance. Next one's going to be reported, seeing as Tip.It's Staff doesn't need rude people around here.

 

 

 

~Mr. Devnull

[eyehawk78]

Off-Topic:

 

Can we have a D V Devnull subforum for Forums Updates and Suggestions? Seriously, so we can ignore all the insignificant pointless threads.

 

My new text line below my stat sig is in direct regard to you and one other person who seem bent on insultive behavior. Learn it, and thanks in advance. Next one's going to be reported, seeing as Tip.It's Staff doesn't need rude people around here.

 

 

 

~Mr. Devnull

I hope you dont mean me :roll:

[Cruiser]

Maybe phpBB group can provide clean-up services to those who have modded their stuff a lot. :-s

 

It isn't a matter of Albosky not being able to do it (due to knowlege or MODs). It's just a flat out waste of time and server resources. Running through all 2.6m posts (plus PMs) and replacing tags so they work with the changes would take a ton of server resources and just isn't worth the time and headaches it would cause.

[Guest]

Off-Topic:

 

Can we have a D V Devnull subforum for Forums Updates and Suggestions? Seriously, so we can ignore all the insignificant pointless threads.

 

My new text line below my stat sig is in direct regard to you and one other person who seem bent on insultive behavior. Learn it, and thanks in advance. Next one's going to be reported, seeing as Tip.It's Staff doesn't need rude people around here.

 

 

 

~Mr. Devnull

 

 

 

Get over it. If you haven't already realized tip.it staff don't want you around here. They'd love it if you stayed off the FU&S Board - take a hint from all your other meaningless threads over the last 6 months.

 

 

 

But by all means go ahead and report me, and while your at it include where in the rules it says me having an opinion on you is against the rules.

 

 

 

And by the way my first comment was a joke but considering you've had a cry over it then by all means you deserve to be mildly flamed back.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Mr. Eelspremiers (Because I feel more significant having this stupid ~ ending). :roll:

 

 

 

---------------

 

 

 

 

 

Ontopic: Your suggestion as stated isn't worth Albosky's time changing it. Its worked for everyone else up until now and changing it will just annoy the majority of users who are fine and comfortable with using the specific BB Code.

[D. V. Devnull]

Off-Topic:

 

<<<Quote Snipped>>>

 

 

 

I hope you dont mean me :roll:

 

Nope, I don't, eyehawk78. :)

 

 

 

 

 

=========================

 

On-Topic:

 

Maybe phpBB group can provide clean-up services to those who have modded their stuff a lot. :-s

 

It isn't a matter of Albosky not being able to do it (due to knowlege or MODs). It's just a flat out waste of time and server resources. Running through all 2.6m posts (plus PMs) and replacing tags so they work with the changes would take a ton of server resources and just isn't worth the time and headaches it would cause.

 

<<<Off-Topic Section Ignored>>>

 

 

 

Ontopic: Your suggestion as stated isn't worth Albosky's time changing it. Its worked for everyone else up until now and changing it will just annoy the majority of users who are fine and comfortable with using the specific BB Code.

 

Points taken. I guess I can just forget this. Although I hate not being able to use possessive forms of language in the Hide Tag and any characters that would be such in URL tags, I guess I need to get used to living with it, just like the million-some-odd other users.

 

 

 

I will admit, though, I do wonder just how many other people have felt the same way as I have... :-k ...

 

 

 

Someone lock this thread before the flaming can go any further, unless anyone wishes to wait for on-topic stuff in regard to this matter.

 

 

 

~Mr. Devnull

 

(Un-official Flame Attractant of Tip.It :wall: ... [Yes, I'm aiming the joke at myself, have a laugh!] ...)

[azntemplar_00]

Rinse and repeat.

[____]

@dev: given the amount of hate - i'd say bugger all people on this forum are this touchy about trivial crap. And given the amount of people who use phpbb and the obvious lack of complaints about it on the official boards - the developers don't consider it a major issue.

 

 

 

 

 

obsessive-compulsive perhaps?

[azntemplar_00]

gah.