My first post looks bad April 9, 2000 3:19 PM   Subscribe

Ok, I've posted my first original link. And I discovered that the entry parser for new posts works almost, but not entirely, unlike the parser for followups. Blank lines don't automatically turn into

tags, I need a
in my sig that I don't need on followups, and if I *do* use a

, the nice indented formatting blows all to hell.

Um, "what the hell"? :-)

-- jra
posted by baylink to Bugs at 3:19 PM (3 comments total)

At the top of your post here you linked to the URL
where I must assume you intended to write
posted by EngineBeak at 4:44 PM on April 9, 2000

I purposely ignore carriage returns on the front page posts because I don't want links to have lots of blank lines in them, It's ok for comments, but I want the already-sometimes-too-long front page to stay as short as possible.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 6:52 PM on April 9, 2000

Ah, but you *don't* ignore

tags. And instead of getting ignored, they break things. The most effective solution to this would be to follow the principle of least astonishment: _tell people_ they're not going to work. It saves ever so much hassle and frustration.

Note also that the editor has the fairly common "even if you remember to escape the left-brackets the first time they're going to get broken on the second pass" problem; I _tried_; really I did.

Oh, and thanks, Beak; but no, the problem was that I really didn't have anything to point at -- but the parser doesn't notice _blank_ URL fields and fail to make the Title a link, so the link is to "", which browsers _parse_ as "here".

Or were you just picking on my clicktracking? ;-)

-- jra
posted by baylink at 9:32 PM on April 9, 2000

« Older Had those forwarded from my aunt last month.   |   I want more on your profiles Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments