Getting back to inconsequential nitpicking: I find the "___ image replies omitted" phrase to be a bit redundant, and for one it confuses me as to whether or not those image replies are separate from text-only replies. How about simply calling it "images"?

>>Well, then you are out of luck, aren't you? So you want to enter your E-Mail but cannot because then the post wouldn't bump then? Solution: Write it in the comment field, problem fixed.

There is no reason to change well-known keywords for this or even turn this into a frustratingly unconvenient tickbox/checkbox.
Having a specific trigger to trigger ID would also work.

>discussion of only one comment box, then you couldn't talk about sage/fusianasan/whatever

You could only trigger the functions in a specific format, say

:link-sage
:name-blah#faggot

lol comment

I do not believe this was an actual request, but it is obviously possible and usable. Another way would be escaping keywords that you want to post.

> partition to kill secure tripcodes

Why? If you are going to get rid of secure tripcodes you should get rid of tripcodes by the same reasons. On another note, why have I seen partition instead of petition multiple times?

>So I misspelled one word once. Sue me!

My point was that it is unnesessarily obtuse, not nit-picking that you misspelled it.

>This is a widely used system. There is a very low learning curve here. sage = does not bump thread when replying, that's all there is to know. People can then figure out why it is useful on their own.

You would think there is a low learning curve, but that is not really the case. For example, on an imageboard, what effect do you have making a sage post (with no real content) with prune oldest and a permasage limit? What about prune oldest with a permasage limit that excludes sage replies?

>trigger replacements

I'm not sure what to replace sage with, if anything. Down certainly doesn't describe it (to me it implies the reverse of age, which is not the case). don't_bump or dont_bump? show_host or show_ip works for fusianasan imo... show_ID to trigger ID?

the text

c < d

causes a <d> tag to be opened, which is not on the list, and therefore all the text until the next tag will be deleted. a better behavior in this case would be to just convert that < to &lt;. you even ought to do this for

a < b

too, despite the fact that b is a valid tag, because who the hell leaves the closing angle bracket out of their HTML tag?

creating the correct regexes for this is an exercise left to the reader.

> Reintroduction of "Marked for deletion (old)"

I actually don't like that, and think wakaba should no longer use the futaba style of dropping threads by default. Why not use the least-popular option instead? If a thread is in demand, let it live.

>>9
I mentioned the option because on highly active boards it's helpful to know which threads will be gone in the next few minutes.

> Why?

I am not the user who initiated this parition but I find them to be triggered far too often.

> On another note, why have I seen partition instead of petition multiple times?

An old imageboard meme. Don't ask!

While we're on that note, can there be a config.pl option to toggle between opening file attachments in a new window or in the current window?

I notice some weirdness with the CSS changes sometimes. For example, the first post on a -100 page will sometimes have the first character of the post enlarged. >>2 looks something like
\
/>2 until it is mouse-overed or you change the CSS, but then it goes back to large again on refresh. Also can happen with lowercase letters. Some of the field labels also change size from refreshing in a certain CSS versus just switching to it.

>It's all a design & layout question. I'd like to have the interface reduced to what is absolutely neccessary, esp. since I do not think many people really want to even bother or bother very often with the whole markup question.

Why have a name field or link field? For the majority of posts they are not used, or only used for sage. As stated earlier, they are not even needed for the bare minimum of usage. You want to prove it is you posting? Use a gpg signature or something and a third-party extension, it is just fluff that is not needed at all!

I'm all for having a system that is easy to modify to the end-user's wants and needs. However, there are going to be plenty of users that are not hardcore enough to make or use such options. Therefore, the normal functionality should be pretty usable.

People seem to pop-up whenever something that would change the interface to shout it down. They seem to fear any change and normally give no reason other than it would clutter things up or some nonsense. Does the CSS selector -really- get in your way? It is probably a whole ten pixels! Is having the More options thing really ruining your experience, or are you just against it on some principle? Personally, I would move it below the comment text-area or something, as now the tab amounts between the main fields has changed.

Semantical nitpick: shouldn't the "Page top" link be called "Thread list"?

0ch-PHP had this nifty feature where if it was a certain "high bandwidth" time of day, then you couldn't view the whole thread.

Hm... that is kind of useless on a worldwide forum, huh?

But there should still be an option to keep people from viewing more than 100-200 posts, as an emergency way of saving bandwidth.

I hate that blue link next to the reply box! It looks ugly!

Also, there's no "Less options..."

Can't this be somewhere else but the post form?

>>Well, then you are out of luck, aren't you? So you want to enter your E-Mail but cannot because then the post wouldn't bump then? Solution: Write it in the comment field, problem fixed.

There is no reason to change well-known keywords for this or even turn this into a frustratingly unconvenient tickbox/checkbox.
Having a specific trigger to trigger ID would also work.

>discussion of only one comment box, then you couldn't talk about sage/fusianasan/whatever

You could only trigger the functions in a specific format, say

:link-sage
:name-blah#faggot

lol comment

I do not believe this was an actual request, but it is obviously possible and usable. Another way would be escaping keywords that you want to post.

> partition to kill secure tripcodes

Why? If you are going to get rid of secure tripcodes you should get rid of tripcodes by the same reasons. On another note, why have I seen partition instead of petition multiple times?

>So I misspelled one word once. Sue me!

My point was that it is unnesessarily obtuse, not nit-picking that you misspelled it.

>This is a widely used system. There is a very low learning curve here. sage = does not bump thread when replying, that's all there is to know. People can then figure out why it is useful on their own.

You would think there is a low learning curve, but that is not really the case. For example, on an imageboard, what effect do you have making a sage post (with no real content) with prune oldest and a permasage limit? What about prune oldest with a permasage limit that excludes sage replies?

>trigger replacements

I'm not sure what to replace sage with, if anything. Down certainly doesn't describe it (to me it implies the reverse of age, which is not the case). don't_bump or dont_bump? show_host or show_ip works for fusianasan imo... show_ID to trigger ID?

> Why?

I am not the user who initiated this parition but I find them to be triggered far too often.

> On another note, why have I seen partition instead of petition multiple times?

An old imageboard meme. Don't ask!

>>151 It's all public domain, I believe.

>>259

Fixed.

>>260-261

The test script doesn't try to handle charsets at all at the moment.

>>247

Well, you have your chance to try and abuse it over on the test page. Although the list of allowed tags there doesn't exactly match what would be allowed here.

Also, the point is to make the type of markup selectable, so you can pick WakabaMark or HTML or none at all.

>>96
forgot to mention that maybe a parameter could be included in config.pl to define an XHTML file for the disclaimer/rules block. It could be used both in 2ch and Futaba (right under the posting area) modes.

About the etyomology of "fusianasan":
http://4-ch.net/nihongo/kareha.pl/1102656968/224-

I don't see any inconsistencies in >>341 except for the rounded corners.

> how about having a third party create extensions for those browsers and freeing up the real estate on the actual page?

What's with this obsession on removing the CSS options? It's a single line, and some of us find it useful.

Real estate? Scroll down.

>>357
by "including," I mean "plus."

> the only boards that use them are image boards where you have to load images anyway.

Correction: http://www.akatsukimanga.com/kareha/

>>336
IMO minimalist web applications like Kareha should only focus on core content/functionality and leave the inconsequential presentation options up to browser extensions so that each user can tweak them to his whim. That's why I was pushing to offload the CSS selector to an extension.

>>337
Here's a better example, I think. Even if we can't remove the excessive side borders, is there a way to at least have rounded corners?

On formatting options: I think >>338 fails to understand that leaving the formatting options up to each individual user is a good thing by all means. Besides, they are absolutely necessary to the interface and core functionality, just like the Name and URL fields are. Preview functionality, on the other hand, should be implemented in an extension.

I think the issue that people have with the formatting options is that we don't have a Japanese counterpart to blindly model it after. Since we're going at this on our own, nobody is quite sure how it should be done. I'd like to see how it turns out on mode_image (if you feel the need to include it at all). :)

>>184
If people are going to decide to use custom names for paramaters, then there isn't much you can do about it anyway, or is there?

The Futaba template is missing the "No File" checkbox next to the File field in the Post New Thread area.

Hmm, looks like my ISP fails at keeping my IP secret.

Random post: The test thread could use some linking in the notes at the bottom (what's the common nomenclature for that one?).

>>89

>But the body text is even more important, and that goes at the bottom. So I dunno.

Yeah, I considered this too. I'm mainly suggesting for the sake of convention.

We definitely don't need a separate page for creating new threads (I get bad memories of Shiichan), mainly because it's inconvenient and requires a whole other page for something that really shouldn't. The fact that it'd be at the bottom of the board page already detracts bad posters with itchy trigger fingers. I think most of us have an "End" key on our keyboards, so we don't really have to scroll all the way down anyway. :) Really, the only issue I have with moving the post box to the bottom is that it ruins my personal visualization of new threads falling on top of the "stack of threads" and replies emerging from below the "stack of replies".

In reference to >>90, there's something I see on every 2ch board that is a lot less prevalent in Western counterparts (barring certain 4-ch boards): a rules/disclaimer block at the top, above the thread-list, with links to a newbie guide, site FAQ, and the like. Yes, it may be an annoyance to veterans, but being at the very top means it's most visible to newbies. That way, we don't get a constant influx of people wondering whether or not they need to fill in the Name and Link fields and what the hell sage and tripcodes are.