[Q_BE]

On 5/30/07, I PMed Matt some questions I had about the posting windows. Here's the substance of that PM by me.

Quote:
Q_BE wrote:

Dear Matt,

Allow me to refer you to this thread:

http://forum.bearchive.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=568086#Post568086

It begins as a humorously satirical tirade about plagiarism and how many popular catchphrases are common enough by design so that people say them and remember the product. It utilized a nifty piece of HTML code that allows a wordbox to appear above the actual phrase.

Posters like myself were initially baffled as to how to replicate this codework, and we came upon the discussion of the differences between the three types of posting windows: the "initial reply" window, the "preview reply" window, and the "edit reply" window.

Most notable of the differences was, in fact, that the option to enable UBBCode and/or HTML was only present in the "initial reply" window, and not in the "preview reply" or "edit reply" windows.

In short, I was wondering whether anyone could work on modifying the different posting windows so that all of them display all the options?

Sincerely,

Q-BE

Matt graciously replied that he would have the webmaster look into it, and would PM me with any info. I again thank him for his courtesy.

I am posting this here in order to re-raise the question, and to obtain any updates on this matter.

Thanks,

Q-BE

[MasterDragonfly]

Might be moot.

I don't recall where it would be posted (maybe pinned to the top of one or more forums), but the ability to post HTML in any form has been radically curtailed in an effort to nullify spambots.

So, even if the menu option gets added to the Compose window (if I read your post correctly), you'll still be severely hampered in what sort of HTML you can usefully create.

[gonZo]

Right... HTML was completely turned off in January as a security measure.  Won't work at all.  UBBCode and plain text are the only options.  Reinstating HTML would require a reversal of the decision (by the mods and admins) to turn it off, and that isn't likely to happen.

[rtpoe]

I recall that part of the problem was people slipping HTML into their posts which would screw up the entire page.

[Palomine]

Quote:
rtpoe said:
I recall that part of the problem was people slipping HTML into their posts which would screw up the entire page.

Yes, as I understand it, that did account for part of the reason that HTML was disabled. Whink and a couple other users exploited HTML to intentionally disrupt  parts of the forum for all users. Thus, it was decided that it was better to turn off HTML in order to protect the site, even if it meant losing those functions within posts. Had such incidents not transpired, it's likely we'd still have HTML within posts today.  

[Q_BE]

Quote:
Palomine said:
Yes, as I understand it, that did account for part of the reason that HTML was disabled. Whink and a couple other users exploited HTML to intentionally disrupt  parts of the forum for all users. Thus, it was decided that it was better to turn off HTML in order to protect the site, even if it meant losing those functions within posts. Had such incidents not transpired, it's likely we'd still have HTML within posts today.  

Add it to the list of rules invented of, by, and for bad posters.

One tangential question: why does previous posts' HTML still work?

[gonZo]

HTML is filtered out of new posts.  Messages posted before filtering was installed were not retrofiltered.