For the next version of the post editor...

A really, really geeky feedback item...

Jeff: the [code] tag does not behave in the expected manner, at least not in the way I thought the HTML version behaves...

Ideally, the [code] tag should provide the post author with a way to turn off the parser for anything other than a [/code] tag...that is to say, parsing of tags, and (more critically, actually) the auto-identification of URIs.

Just a suggestion... :)

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Man... I can't belive I read that.

You read it, but did it make any sense? I warned you that it was "extremely geeky"!

It DOES have a practical application: every time someone tries to explain how to do a link or a smiley face, most people can't figure out how to insert the codes into the message without the parser doing whatever the code is supposed to do. There is a way to do it, by the way...for the first message in this thread, for instance, in order to put that [code] tag in there, what I had to type was "[code]", which prevents the parser from seeing the [ and ] characters.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

You do realize, Dave, that the percentage of instances where the audience would have to do that is almost zero, right?

By the way, I haven't used Steph's iBook lately. Does the box on FreeTextBox appear as a rich editor in Safari? In Mac Firefox?

Yeah, and I figure we won't see it unless you have to re-write the parser for some other reason. But I can suggest it anyway. :)

Now about those FreeTextBox options...

Firefox 0.8 displays the rich editor.

Safari 1.0.2 v85.7 (last OS-X.2 version) shows plain editor.

Camino 0.7 (Mozilla) shows plain editor.

Safari 1.2.2 v125.8 (OS-X.3) shows plain editor.

Internet Explorer 5.2.3 (5815.1), which is the only version of IE I have (because I haven't managed to nuke it yet) not only shows the plain editor, it shows it very slowly, using Classic wait cursors. Gawd this browser sucks!

In Safari I can change the User Agent to Mozilla 1.1, Netscape 7.0, Netscape 6.2.2, Netscape 4.79, Mac MSIE 5.22, Windows MSIE 6.0, or Konqueror 3. I tried each of those with FreeTextBox, and the only setting that gave me the rich text editor was "Windows MSIE 6.0". And with that setting, I got the rich text box, but of course it didn't work because I got the IE version instead of the Mozilla version.

Hmmm...I wonder if there is some way to force the server to send the Mozilla rich editor version to Safari to find out if it actually works (which it might in 1.2.2). I know a lot of things that didn't work in Safari 1.0.2 work great in 1.2.2. Hmmmmm...

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

The fact that it worked in Firefox is good to hear. The guy that developed that control has far more patience than I do.

I'm familiar with basic html code, but nothing to the degree of what your talking about. All I know about html I learned from reading source code.

---

RideMan said:
Firefox 0.8 displays the rich editor.

---

You mean to tell me you're still using Firefox 0.8!? Get with the program! Firefox 0.9 has been available for about a week now!

And you call yourself a nerd... ;)

-John, proud Firefox user

Not a 'nerd,' John, a 'geek.' There is a difference. :)

I haven't bothered to download the newer Firefox for MacOS because I've found that Safari usually works better, and where Safari fails, Camino usually works.

I'm not sure what version of Firefox I have on the Windows box, as that box is at work and thanks to the holiday, I am not. :)

--Dave Althoff, Jr.