Page 1 of 1 [ 5 posts ]
03 Jul 2009, 6:45 am
03 Jul 2009, 7:29 am
03 Jul 2009, 8:01 am
03 Jul 2009, 8:53 am
04 Jul 2009, 7:38 am
MikeH106 wrote:
So far, I've found three bugs on this site:
1. Messages are labeled one date ahead of time.
2. Signatures aren't allowing certain HTML codes (italic and boldface).
3. Responses to articles don't print carriage returns, which turns the response into one long snake of statements that can't be read as easily.
I also have a suggestion: If you like, you may include a threading tree feature that allows you to see who replied to whom in the forums, similar to that found on Usenet. This might even reduce social tension in replying to many people at once.
...
Oh, and a fourth bug:
'Search user posts' doesn't carry advanced options any further than the first page of results. You might want to check into this.
1. Messages are labeled one date ahead of time.
2. Signatures aren't allowing certain HTML codes (italic and boldface).
3. Responses to articles don't print carriage returns, which turns the response into one long snake of statements that can't be read as easily.
I also have a suggestion: If you like, you may include a threading tree feature that allows you to see who replied to whom in the forums, similar to that found on Usenet. This might even reduce social tension in replying to many people at once.
...
Oh, and a fourth bug:
'Search user posts' doesn't carry advanced options any further than the first page of results. You might want to check into this.
- "Messages are labeled one date ahead of time."
I'm unclear what you mean by this. Have you set your time zone incorrectly? There is a problem concerning the DST setting, which is not handled very well. The forum software doesn't provide for TZ setting, but only allows for a too coarsely populated offset list of times. I.e. Any member in India cannot see the times correctly (as they are UTC+5:30 (IST), which is not provided for at all). - "Signatures aren't allowing certain HTML codes (italic and boldface)."
Indeed, signatures allow pretty much nothing but text. That is exactly as intended. - "Responses to articles don't print carriage returns, which turns the response into one long snake of statements that can't be read as easily."
I can't say that I had noticed this. I have to say that I have never really used the articles side of things at all. - "'Search user posts' doesn't carry advanced options any further than the first page of results."
Yep. There are quite a few facilities that don't "carry through" options correctly. One of my pet "niggles" is that if you hit "Watch this topic for replies" / "Stop watching this topic" on anything bat the first page of a thread, it does nothing but take you to the first post of the thread, where you have to scroll to the bottom, and hit it again.
I suspect this behaviour is due to the use of remapping on the URIs, and I don't think I have any control over that (yet).
As I get time, I'm trying to get to grips with the (patched) source code. So far, I've been loath to make any "minor corrections" to any of the code, in case they instantly turn into "major disasters".
...
Re: the "threading tree"... as per usenet news, which I use, I find it pretty awful, usually. As a thread branches, I find it becomes pretty unreadable. Within the straightforward linear quoting, here, one can always use cut&paste to combine replies to multiple people into one post, or at the opposite extreme, start a new thread, and post a link to the new thread within the thread you wish to branch out from.
