|
It's easier that way.....
Brad
Australian
- Christian Graus on "Best books for VBscript"
A big thick one, so you can whack yourself on the head with it.
|
|
|
|
|
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar wrote: The appropriate forums page itself can have a small DIV on top and display this message right?
It could do. I don't think it is that important compared to other features that we'd like to see.
|
|
|
|
|
When you click 'Messages Posted' or 'Articles Posted' from User's Profile page, you see a list of hyperlinks but each line states -- Authorname
Rather than this, we can have a caption "Articles Posted by Authorname" and just list all the articles. A similar trick can be cloned for messages also.
This way, for a long authorname, the number of times it repeats and swells the pagesize can be minimized.
|
|
|
|
|
But since a person can change their display name, you would want to know which display name they posted the message as.
|
|
|
|
|
The GetLink that exists for any message does a fullpage refresh. I don't think this is judicious use of server resources. I have two suggestions to this perspective:
1. We have the GetLink text to read as ClipLink and we can prompt for adding Favorites.
2. We can copy the link to Clipboard instead of URL Redirecting.
|
|
|
|
|
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar wrote: The GetLink that exists for any message does a fullpage refresh. I don't think this is judicious use of server resources.
Since, as far as I can see, it exists so that a person can right click it and copy the URL to the clipboard to be used elsewhere it doesn't matter the resources it uses if someone accidentally left-clicks on it.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar wrote: We have the GetLink text to read as ClipLink and we can prompt for adding Favorites.
I don't see what renaming it would do - and I never use the link in my favourites anyway - I don't know anyone that does, I don't think that's what it was created for.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar wrote: We can copy the link to Clipboard instead of URL Redirecting.
I already do. 
|
|
|
|
|
It's not meant to be clicked, you right-click it and pick Copy to put the URL on the clipboard. It's like a PermaLink in blog terms.
The trouble with doing this automatically is two-fold
1. AFAIK only IE has built-in clipboard support
2. Clipboard access can be turned off, and in the default configuation, IE shows a scary warning message when the page tries to use the clipboard.
|
|
|
|
|
[IE7, Vista]
Previewing a response to a post causes focus to be transfered to the parent window a couple of seconds after displaying the preview window. I can't tell you how annoying this is. OK, I can. OK, I just did. 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
If only there was some way of previewing your post without opening a new window... 
|
|
|
|
|
...on IE.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Ravi Bhavnani wrote: IE
Ah, well. There's always a trade-off, i suppose...
Last modified: 10mins after originally posted -- Fixed quote. Oops...
|
|
|
|
|
Um... I hope CPhog didn't add the wrong attribution in your reply.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shog9 wrote: If only there was some way of previewing your post without opening a new window...
----
Scripts i’ve known...
CPhog 1.8.2 - make CP better.
Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve
Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums
Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages
In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete
Spam, spam, spam. You should be imitated. Or at least hired.
Seriously, though: Why are these features so (apparently) easy for you to implement and so hard for the CodeProject folks? Is it the tools you're using? What?
By the way, the above signature had so many lines I couldn't quote it properly when composing this post - the last line was clipped in the display box. Am I reporting this problem to the right person?
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: By the way, the above signature had so many lines I couldn't quote it properly when composing this post - the last line was clipped in the display box.
I do that with my signatures, just to be difficult.
The Grand Negus wrote: Why are these features so (apparently) easy for you to implement and so hard for the CodeProject folks? Is it the tools you're using?
Well, i do use great tools. But i suspect The Management has been a bit distracted by The Re-Write.
Nothing like writing The Second System to get your creative juices flowing... 
|
|
|
|
|
Shog9 wrote: Well, i do use great tools. But i suspect The Management has been a bit distracted by The Re-Write.
Nothing like writing The Second System to get your creative juices flowing...
Well, then, good for them. Too bad your stuff will be made obsolete by the built-in wysiwyg message editor, the new printing facilities, the delete-in-place function, and all of the other features they'll be including in the re-written version.
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: Too bad your stuff will be made obsolete by the built-in wysiwyg message editor, the new printing facilities, the delete-in-place function, and all of the other features they'll be including in the re-written version.
Not at all - it'll have served it's purpose (it's purpose being: i get it first)
|
|
|
|
|
It's so hard to write good sarcasm. There's a possibility, I would think, that your stuff won't be made obsolete by the re-write...
|
|
|
|
|
Don't you get it? He doesn't care!
Why did people write the C programming language when they knew it would be made obsolete by Plain English?
|
|
|
|
|
Ed.Poore wrote: Don't you get it? He doesn't care!
Ed, you missed Osmo's sarcastic dig at Chris M. He's not going after Shog, he's going after Chris M. 
|
|
|
|
|
Do you have a link, or has it been obliterated via Report as Abuse or Spam?
I have no idea what I just said but my intentions were sincere.
Poore Design
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ta! ![Beer | [beer]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/beer.gif)
Eh??? 
I have no idea what I just said but my intentions were sincere.
Poore Design
|
|
|
|
|
Ed.Poore wrote: Eh???
Let me help you out. Since the first Macintosh was introduced decades ago, it became obvious to nearly every normal person that wysiwyg editing is superior - far superior - to the "edit here and preview there" approach. Nevertheless, on this (and many other sites) the user is unable to do what those one-megabyte, one-megahertz Macs could do. It seems that Shog has addressed and solved the problem, in his spare time, while the "professionals" at CodeProject either don't see the problem, or don't care, or whatever. I'm wondering if the re-write that we keep hearing about will be as good as Shog's add-ons. That's all. Can they, after more than seven years, finally get the premier coding site up to the standards set by the early Macintoshes without using third-party add-ons?
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: It seems that Shog has addressed and solved the problem, in his spare time, while the "professionals" at CodeProject either don't see the problem, or don't care, or whatever.
Osmo,
Instead of acknowledging that Shog's a genius, you are trying to make it look as if what Shog does is the norm and therefore CP-devs have to be bad. You have to get a proper perspective of Shog's astonishing abilities (both in terms of web-scripting and in terms of innovative ideas), before you go complaining that CP's not as good as Shog's add-on is.
Also, Shog's not answerable if CPHog breaks something. The few hundred who use it would not be mad at him if it causes something bad to happen. But Chris can't take the same risks. For instance, I've noticed on multiple occasions in the last week how people using CPHog are misquoting authors when they reply to a post. It seems to be a CPHog bug where the parent post's author is associated with the current post's content. No one complained and the issue is not even noticed much or commented upon. If Chris made a similar bug he'd have been attacked strongly on the Lounge and would have received a few 1000 angry emails.
So by comparing CPHog's powerful UI with CP's native UI, you are being as unfair as you possibly could be.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
