Forums
RS-Linkify
Quick find code: 261-262-33-65181208
Hiya
Ryan M
I'm curious about them too. I just want to see the image files so I can use them as a template for Linkify buttons.
That's a good idea for an indicator of when things are getting close (assuming they get uploaded before hand). I might keep an eye on them.
I see Mod Allstar commented on your recent post too
Seems the thread is mostly about signatures lately. If they stopped counting BB codes as characters they'd solve a couple of issues. He suggests not using the sig feature for +200 characters, and just post 4 line sigs as normal.
Not sure what to make of that. I'd have thought developing around the existing sig guidelines would be wise.
Concerns me a little since I'm dropping signatures, but I guess it'll all work out
I'm curious about them too. I just want to see the image files so I can use them as a template for Linkify buttons.
That's a good idea for an indicator of when things are getting close (assuming they get uploaded before hand). I might keep an eye on them.
I see Mod Allstar commented on your recent post too
Seems the thread is mostly about signatures lately. If they stopped counting BB codes as characters they'd solve a couple of issues. He suggests not using the sig feature for +200 characters, and just post 4 line sigs as normal.
Not sure what to make of that. I'd have thought developing around the existing sig guidelines would be wise.
Concerns me a little since I'm dropping signatures, but I guess it'll all work out
18-Mar-2015 06:52:09
^Soon or Soon™ is fine with me.
I have accepted that I can't be ready when it happens. But when it happens I hope to push out my new build and work from that.
That means RS Linkify v4 wont be full featured, but it will develop pretty fast once it has pages it can run on.
I have to keep in mind, even though the current Linkify isn't getting much in the way of updates, and there are many things I want to tidy up and improve. It's rock solid stable. Considering the code that's been tacked on and wedged in, I'm actually amazed at that.
That's a big reason why I'm okay with leaving it for an undetermined amount of time. Soon™ isn't bad for me because Linkify is doing okay.
Soon isn't bad for me either, it means I can get my teeth into something new and apply some of the recent suggestions and ideas.
Either way, it's all good
(as long as I'm not working on two different builds for two different forums at the same time)
I have accepted that I can't be ready when it happens. But when it happens I hope to push out my new build and work from that.
That means RS Linkify v4 wont be full featured, but it will develop pretty fast once it has pages it can run on.
I have to keep in mind, even though the current Linkify isn't getting much in the way of updates, and there are many things I want to tidy up and improve. It's rock solid stable. Considering the code that's been tacked on and wedged in, I'm actually amazed at that.
That's a big reason why I'm okay with leaving it for an undetermined amount of time. Soon™ isn't bad for me because Linkify is doing okay.
Soon isn't bad for me either, it means I can get my teeth into something new and apply some of the recent suggestions and ideas.
Either way, it's all good
(as long as I'm not working on two different builds for two different forums at the same time)
18-Mar-2015 13:22:34
Fryes
said
:
Is it possible to turn off the way it changes post backgrounds and font? The only feature I'd like on is the fixed links.
Post backgrounds are optional. It depends on how you've configured your settings. This thread is the only exception to that.
I assume by font you mean this one?. I don't see it overly used but I'm happy to look into adding an option to disable all linkify BB tags.
If you mean the font on page one of this thread, that again is unique to this thread.
Assuming you were just referring to this single thread, I'll explain...
These customisations are the result of experimentation, there are other things that apply to this thread only for testing purposes. I need at least one thread for this kind of stuff. That place is here. I don't think this impacts the rest of the forums in any way, in fact that's whole idea behind this is to keep experimental things out of the rest of the forums.
Some of the things that have remained on this thread are simply because people wanted them to stay, and I have no plans to change this.
Hope that explains why things are the way they are
Is it possible to turn off the way it changes post backgrounds and font? The only feature I'd like on is the fixed links.
Post backgrounds are optional. It depends on how you've configured your settings. This thread is the only exception to that.
I assume by font you mean this one?. I don't see it overly used but I'm happy to look into adding an option to disable all linkify BB tags.
If you mean the font on page one of this thread, that again is unique to this thread.
Assuming you were just referring to this single thread, I'll explain...
These customisations are the result of experimentation, there are other things that apply to this thread only for testing purposes. I need at least one thread for this kind of stuff. That place is here. I don't think this impacts the rest of the forums in any way, in fact that's whole idea behind this is to keep experimental things out of the rest of the forums.
Some of the things that have remained on this thread are simply because people wanted them to stay, and I have no plans to change this.
Hope that explains why things are the way they are
18-Mar-2015 21:46:56 - Last edited on 18-Mar-2015 23:35:15 by Indecent Act
Hiya
Ryan M
Thanks for the vid, I vaguely recall some of the things said but I'm not sure I ever saw that vid. So it was good to watch. I have always been amazed at the game side of things, concurrent connections and such, I cant fathom how they do it.
I was surprised with the sigs, looks like they will work like display names and forum avatars. I can appreciate the load they will make. I guess it's just that I wouldn't have went that way, but that's just my opinion of load v's benefits.
As we know textareas don't have a line parameter, so I can see why they went with character limit. If they were using a mono-space font (yuk) that could work to the line. It's not hard to use js to work with lines, but it is a little ugly. I have an old working example on my site when I wrote a BB parser. http://www.indecentcode.com/new_options/
I expect there are better ways to do it than the method I used.
I'm not sure I see the issue with quoting (might be missing something). I thought they wouldn't be quoted, and I thought that's a good thing. Removal of sigs from quotes has been requested numerous times on this thread and elsewhere. I have no intentions of making sigs quotable.
As you say, the limitations for sigs may be a lot depending on the style. But it comes back to not building the update around the sig guidelines. The choice, Lightweight non updating sigs, that meet the guidelines, or more resource heavy sigs that don't honour guidelines and have extra limitations.
The only benefit I can see is when a qfc in a sig becomes redundant, updating sig fixes all sigs. But how often are those sig qfcs clicked? Does updating all sigs on page 50, page 20, or even page 5 matter? I think not. Same could be said about avatars but I expect they are tied in with display names and are handled together.
I feel I must be missing something here, because I'd choose a non updating method from both a dev and user's perspective.
Thanks for the vid, I vaguely recall some of the things said but I'm not sure I ever saw that vid. So it was good to watch. I have always been amazed at the game side of things, concurrent connections and such, I cant fathom how they do it.
I was surprised with the sigs, looks like they will work like display names and forum avatars. I can appreciate the load they will make. I guess it's just that I wouldn't have went that way, but that's just my opinion of load v's benefits.
As we know textareas don't have a line parameter, so I can see why they went with character limit. If they were using a mono-space font (yuk) that could work to the line. It's not hard to use js to work with lines, but it is a little ugly. I have an old working example on my site when I wrote a BB parser. http://www.indecentcode.com/new_options/
I expect there are better ways to do it than the method I used.
I'm not sure I see the issue with quoting (might be missing something). I thought they wouldn't be quoted, and I thought that's a good thing. Removal of sigs from quotes has been requested numerous times on this thread and elsewhere. I have no intentions of making sigs quotable.
As you say, the limitations for sigs may be a lot depending on the style. But it comes back to not building the update around the sig guidelines. The choice, Lightweight non updating sigs, that meet the guidelines, or more resource heavy sigs that don't honour guidelines and have extra limitations.
The only benefit I can see is when a qfc in a sig becomes redundant, updating sig fixes all sigs. But how often are those sig qfcs clicked? Does updating all sigs on page 50, page 20, or even page 5 matter? I think not. Same could be said about avatars but I expect they are tied in with display names and are handled together.
I feel I must be missing something here, because I'd choose a non updating method from both a dev and user's perspective.
18-Mar-2015 22:51:03 - Last edited on 18-Mar-2015 23:39:52 by Indecent Act
Whoops, when I said quoting, I'm talking about those who use ASCII art and would use it in .forum__body and not .forum__signature. I've made an issue out of nothing again, sorry for that. My ramblings cause more headaches in real life an online. Rawr
One thing I hope for is that the signature field will respect Shift+Enter for returns. It'll make some signatures look better.
The following is for comparing old versus new (new with 200 char sig):
http://i.imgur.com/QbdGzwj.png
http://i.imgur.com/KulTsAB.png
One thing I hope for is that the signature field will respect Shift+Enter for returns. It'll make some signatures look better.
The following is for comparing old versus new (new with 200 char sig):
http://i.imgur.com/QbdGzwj.png
http://i.imgur.com/KulTsAB.png
18-Mar-2015 23:37:32
You ramble as much as you like, in fact I encourage it as you can see by my own example
Nice comparison, a visual representation says so much more than the words 200 characters.
Actually, what you just said raises a point I hadn't thought of. Posts using sig field as well as 4 lines ASCII art. Quoting will include whatever is posted in the forum body.
I'm starting to not like this whole signature thing, and it's silly that I feel that way. I worry the new sigs will create more issues than it solves, and it didn't have to be like this.
I'm starting to think the sig guidelines should be changed to match the sig field. I only say this for the sake of consistency and because (for whatever reasons) they wont accommodate the guidelines in the new update.
Nice comparison, a visual representation says so much more than the words 200 characters.
Actually, what you just said raises a point I hadn't thought of. Posts using sig field as well as 4 lines ASCII art. Quoting will include whatever is posted in the forum body.
I'm starting to not like this whole signature thing, and it's silly that I feel that way. I worry the new sigs will create more issues than it solves, and it didn't have to be like this.
I'm starting to think the sig guidelines should be changed to match the sig field. I only say this for the sake of consistency and because (for whatever reasons) they wont accommodate the guidelines in the new update.
18-Mar-2015 23:55:04
Quick find code: 261-262-33-65181208 Back to Top