|
I bet you are one of those people who think Elvis is still dead.
---------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC Link[ ^]
English League Tables - Live
|
|
|
|
|
Nah, Elvis just went home. 
|
|
|
|
|
You'd prefer not to hear from him from the beyond the veil? OK, I'll fix that.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
RJOberg wrote: Are we still getting updates from Steve from beyond the grave?
I'll ask him about this
Leslie Nielsen
"I am serious...and don't call me Shirley."
|
|
|
|
|
Hi. Today I have posted a tip:
1. I first submitted the tip.
2. It was looking ok in the editor. In the previous editor of tip writing we used to see the preview under the editor. But in new editor we don't.
3. I submitted the tip without seeing the preview. Yes that was my mistake.
4. Then, I found the code block is broken.
5. Also I found suggestion about the content from one fellow.
6. So, I updated the article and fixed the code format.
Few minutes back I found the tip is published but seems it is the 1st version that is published. The new version is not yet available. Shouldn't the latest version from the writer be published when it gets published for the 1st time?
here is the link of the tip.
How to download powerpoint file using C#
Mahmud Hasan
Software Engineer from Bangladesh
|
|
|
|
|
This seems to be a problem with the new submissions wizard - I am getting the same problem. It doesn't look like its; the first version, I think that it is the latest with the same problem.
However, I have found a workaround.
Edit your Tip, and remove all code - check the preview and make sure you have no non-text elements visible.
Go into HTML mode with the <> button on the toolbar.
Put the cursor where you want your code.
Add the pre tags manually, specifying the language yourself:
<pre lang="c#"></pre>
Then paste your code inside the block (between the > and the <)
Press the <> button again.
The display looks wrong as the syntax colourizer isn't activated, but the preview will include it.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
I mean, seriously.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
modified 9-Mar-12 7:36am.
|
|
|
|
|
A bug, and a serious one.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say... 
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
You need to stop calling him Sasha. It's spelled Sacha and pronounced that way too as far as I know 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm somewhat dyslexic, I think.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
Nish Sivakumar wrote: You need to stop calling him Sasha. It's spelled Sacha and pronounced that way too as far as I know
I think he was watching Henry AspDotNetDev's collection*
EDIT
----------
*Clickety[^]
thatrajaNobody remains a virgin, Life screws everyone 
modified 10-Mar-12 5:15am.
|
|
|
|
|
 I highly recommend Sean's Oily MVP's II: Tassels of Terror.
|
|
|
|
|
AspDotNetDev wrote: I highly recommend Sean's Oily MVP's II: Tassels of Terror.
Why only Sean? Chris too.Sean or I will massage it.
thatrajaNobody remains a virgin, Life screws everyone
|
|
|
|
|
It's complicated!
The previous version had the advantage of looking just like a message, so it was very easy to use - this one takes a bit more think about - not that that is a bad thing, but it does get in it's own way sometimes.
The example of formatted code is a nuisance - because any code you add in a formatted block does not look like it! If you paste code in, it automatically selects "Formatted" (nice) but doesn't apply the pink background unless you highlight the whole block, select "Normal" and then reselect "Formatted"
It also doesn't like pasted code unless the line the cursor is on is completely empty - if you paste in the wrong place (at the end of existing text say) then it formats it, but breaks it into a number of blocks instead of keeping it as a single unit of code.
I have a good idea what I'm doing, and it was frustrating me - I spent a lot more time undoing and faffing about that I did on the Tip content. I'm sure that it will become second nature, but what it will do to someone who is not confident in their right to post a Tip I don't know. I can see some of them deciding it is more trouble that it is worth.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
So, I finally get the tip done - it's ready to go.
Submit! "You haven't previewed it"
Ok, cancel that and Preview...
Yuech.
All of the code blocks that I pasted, and could read perfectly well have suddenly been buried in a huge pile of on-screen HTML...
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
Which Tip? Sean or I will massage it.
If you hit the "<>" icon on the editor toolbar you switch to HTML mode which allows you to enter the HTML directly. If that doesn't help then an option is I could add a Markdown-style mode that allows you to type the content in as you used to, and have the editor switch to proper HTML on the fly. This, however, is tricky since switching from well-formed HTML to Markdown (or the plain-text-with-HTML isn't reliable.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the offer, but now that I know about <> I will have a go myself - that way if I need to help someone, at least I have a better idea what they are going through.
It's more that if I have problems, then a beginner who isn't at all sure what he is doing anyway is likely to get discouraged with the whole idea. What I have at the moment looks fine on screen - until I press the preview or the <> in which case it is pretty obvious there are problems. If you show someone what looks like WYSIWYG then they are going to expect to G what they S! 
Is this a case of "too much pretty, not enough usability"? Was there a real problem with the separate HTML / preview modes we get with messages?
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
Chris, can you move this thread to the Mentoring forum?
I have a feeling that it's going to get a bit long, as either I'm doing things very, very wrong, or there are real problems with the Tip submissions process. I'd like to try explaining what I am doing, and what I get as a result.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
Don't move it - I found a work-around.
Go into HTML mode with <> add the pre tags manually, specifying the language yourself.
Then paste your code inside the block.
The display looks wrong as the syntax colourizer isn't activated, but the preview will include it.
This needs fixing, lots - if looks like the colourizer is kicking in and then the formatter:
Create a tip with the submissions wizard.
Fill in the name, and all the other necessary gubbins - that works fine.
Now, edit the main block of your text so that you have your Tip in English, with no code or supporting stuff.
Use <> and Preview - it's fine.
Go to VS, and highlight your method. Copy it to the clipboard.
Go back to the submissions wizard, and put the cursor where you want your method.
Paste!
Looks good! (It doesn't look like the example in the submissions wizard, but you have deleted that by now so who cares?)
Preview.
O
M
G
You can't see the code for a sea of on-screen HTML.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
Chris, thanks for your earlier explanation of why comments are associated with specific revisions of an article:
http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/4184889/Are-comments-specific-to-an-article-revision.aspx[^]
However, whilst the intention is that comments relating to article quality, whilst it is in the review process, do not make it through to the final - published article. It looks like this doesn't really work in practice!
I spotted a typo on my recently published article, which is now awaiting moderation, and as a result have a number of 'my vote of 5' style comments here:
http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?aid=342715&av=506455#_comments[^]
and here:
http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?aid=342715&av=505884#_comments[^]
and of course, here, in the right place:
Plotting Circular Relationship Graphs with Silverlight
I have never spotted this problem before, so I am guessing this is a new feature? Also, I am pretty sure that in the past minor modifications that I made to an article did not require moderation.
Can I suggest that it is made much more obvious that comments on an article which is awaiting moderation are specifically for the purpose of flagging quality issues? This might be quite hard to do with the way that it is currently set up because it is presented in exactly the same way as the regular article commenting mechanism, so I suspect regulars would just go into 'auto-pilot'.
(Any chance the messages on my article revisions could be moved to the main article? - id this is a big deal, don;t worry about it)
Regards, Colin E.
modified 9-Mar-12 9:37am.
|
|
|
|
|
To my mind, this is a fairly major SNAFU. When I review an article, I like to see all the comments - somebody may have posted a particularly useful snippet against an earlier revision which I would miss if I were looking at a later version. This cannot be right.
While it may be useful to indicate that a message applied to an earlier revision of the article, it should not disappear.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Pete, I am glad you concur.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: While it may be useful to indicate that a message applied to an earlier revision of the article, it should not disappear.
It's worse than that! Messages on future revisions (i.e. new revisions awaiting moderation) do not appear either. I do wonder what will happen when the pending future revision is accepted. Where will those comments go?!!
Anyhow, at least it is not just me being over-eager to get a high comment count on my article for the sake of inflating my ego.
of course not.
I'm very modest I am.
|
|
|
|
|
Colin Eberhardt wrote: It's worse than that! Messages on future revisions (i.e. new revisions awaiting moderation) do not appear either. I do wonder what will happen when the pending future revision is accepted. Where will those comments go?!!
I think I just found out, it looks like the comments do not make it into the published version when the new revision is approved. However, you can see them if you access the article by version number - even though this version is the current:
http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?aid=342715&av=506455#_comments[^]
Anywho - enough said. I'll leave this to the CodeProject peeps.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
