|
We've disabled TABLEs in Tips and Tricks as a saftey precaution.
I'm going to relax this and add them back.
I went through the code and we had already opened up tables. The issue was some code we use to automatically correct badly formed HTML. It didn't like the THEADs you were using, so I fixed the code and reformatted your question. All looks good, and I'll upload the fixes globally in the next day or so.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
modified on Monday, July 19, 2010 11:41 PM
|
|
|
|
|
thanks chris 
|
|
|
|
|
<RandomThoughtOfTheDay>
Would "quick answers" be better suited as "quick questions". The later implies that the questions are 'simple', while the former could imply that an answer would be given promptly.
</RandomThoughtOfTheDay>
|
|
|
|
|
yep.
or just: quickies.
|
|
|
|
|
I second that too. "Quick Question" sounds more appropriate. 
|
|
|
|
|
Andrew Rissing wrote: the former could imply that an answer would be given promptly
That's, um, kinda the goal here.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Okely dokely. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. An untapped market?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Last night i submitted an alternate tip http://www.codeproject.com/Tips/94863/Print-File-Size.aspx#alternate2[^]
and noticed that went to pending on submission, but remains at this state.
Is this new functionality that has been added? who changes the state?
Doesn't matter, its changed state now, suspect it had something to do with bug 532 that i just noticed in the updated bug list.
Dave
Don't forget to rate messages!Find Me On: Web| Facebook| Twitter| LinkedInWaving? dave.m.auld[at]googlewave.com
modified on Monday, July 19, 2010 8:07 AM
|
|
|
|
|
daveauld wrote: suspect it had something to do with bug 532
Nope. It just needed approval, and it was approved soon after you posted that message.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers Chris, has that changed then? I deon't recall tips / alternates requiring approval previously?
|
|
|
|
|
It's a reasonably recent change, yes.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Stuck for about an hour in the "1 out of 3" page trying to upload my files!
... Hey Shog 
|
|
|
|
|
If you send me the article text and files I can help. You can use the submit@ or sean@ address
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, I think I can wait until it's fixed.. Otherwise I'll contact you..
Thank you Sean!
|
|
|
|
|
The article How To Upload Resume On A WebSite[^] was posted by the same guy who then voted it a 5. The content seems somewhat sparse, to say the least. I was under the impression that you cannot vote your own articles/posts.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
This article is currently in composing status. You can see it because you're special.
But everyone can vote for their own article. You have to be able to love yourself before anyone else can
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Ewington wrote: You can see it because you're special.
 I bet you say that to all the boys.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: I bet you say that to all the boys Mentors.
|
|
|
|
|
Damn, I thought I could fool someone into believing I still am a boy!
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
As Sean said, you should start by fooling yourself then.
|
|
|
|
|
The reason it's there is to mitigate against the damage a uni-voter can do to a new article. If the article really is crap it will get a lot of 1's from everyone else canceling out the authors 5. If it's good though an opening uni-vote can bury it where many people will never see it to issue corrective votes.
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Two related situations that have happened to me recently:
1. Posted a message in a Lounge thread. Realised a few seconds/minutes later that I wanted to add something. Clicked on 'Edit' and made the changes (complete with [edit] and [/edit]). Posted it. Problem: no indication that I changed it, because I forgot to add [modified] to the title.
2. Answered a question in a language forum, suggesting that the problem might be a spelling error. For the purpose of this discussion say the original thread title (and question) was "XYZZQ doesn't work". I replied "try XYZZY". OP responded "I did try XYZZ*". The reason for * here is that the email I got had * = Q, so I started to make the obvious reply. By the time it got to the forum, the OP had modifed his reply so * = Y (in the body but not the title), and I had to delete my reply quick smart to avoid looking like a first-class dork. Again, there was no indication that the message (OP's reply) had been altered.
There is also potential for malice in, say, the Back Room:
X posts a contentious declaration.
Y replies "what a load of $%^&"
X modifies his post to reflect Y's pet theory.
So, after all that, the suggestion:
On submission of an edit to a post, the system appends [n] (where n is a revision number) to the title, or increments n if it's already there. This won't completely prevent malicious backdating of posts, but should cover most of the inadvertent omissions.
Point for consideration: Should the edit to a post be emailed just like the original? That might help us figure out what's going on in cases like those described above.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994.
|
|
|
|
|
Peter_in_2780 wrote: Problem: no indication that I changed it, because I forgot to add [modified] to the title
The [modified] tag is added automatically if you edit the post more than 5 minutes after first posting. We don't add it automatically for quick fixes to allow you to do wuick "oops!" fixes.
Peter_in_2780 wrote: X posts a contentious declaration.
Y replies "what a load of $%^&"
X modifies his post to reflect Y's pet theory.
Even if we add "modified' tags, people can still manually remove them. The addition of "modified" tags is a convenience only and should never be relied upon to show actual revision information. The full solution would be sto store all revisions of messages, but my feeling is that the time spent would take us away from things that are, overall, more helpful to the community.
Peter_in_2780 wrote: Should the edit to a post be emailed just like the original
Mailed to whom? If you are talking about an edit to a post to which you have replied, and then when an edit to the original post is made, an emailt o all repliers is done, then that's certainly an interesting idea.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
![Green Alien | [Alien]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/alien.gif)
Kristian Sixhoej
