Well, I don't want to have to read posts without highlighting. It's annoying. Just for that, I don't want leave it off.
On another topic, a vote: I could make the secure tripcodes and other parts of the script that use the SECRET more secure by some small changes, but this would make secure trips change when you install the new version.
Good idea, y/n?
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.
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?
I don't see what's so bad about >>330. The alternative is to force the table to be full width, which will make it uglier (because in HTML all columns will become wider, including the skinniest ones), and harder to read.
> No need for a database, just a text file. You're right about storing IPs, though, but then how can you implement a banning system? Do you use an encrypted IP like the algorithm to generate ID codes?
Banning is done through Apache, which really makes more sense than doing it in the script. I don't want to re-invent the wheel for that.
> I mean that (for example) if I wanted to replace the permasaging function under the MAX_POSTS condition (permasage after X posts) with the thread-closing function (close after X posts), all it would require is a simple replacement of the proper function references in post_stuff(), correct?
No, they're done at different different places, because they are essentially different functions. The permasage behaviour doesn't actually permasage a thread, it only refrains from bumping it. There's no permsage flag added to the thread. The closing, on the other hand, does add a flag to the thread.
> Making "More options..." an option in the configs.
> Seems sensible, when you already have the ability to turn off WakabaMark as a board admin.
No. And I actually removed the DISABLE_WAKABAMARK option since it's no longer really needed. The replacement will be an option to select the default markup for a board, which makes much more sense overall.
∧∧
( ・ω・) It's late
_| ⊃/(___
/ └-(____/
∧∧
( ・ω・ ) Good night!
_| ⊃/(___
/ └-(____/
<⌒/ヽ-、___
/<_/____/
 ̄ ̄
> people like admins might prefer to use them
but they have capcodes now...
I told you to shift-reload!
>does that mean you approve of removing the style selector on subpages?
I was referring to the entire board, but as you later explained, it seems it can never be removed completely. Though removing it from subpages wouldn't be a bad idea I guess.
>Kareha has no "No File" check in the first place
That's what I thought, but then why is it in the Reply pages?
Other: Have you considered multi-page links with intervals of 100 posts at the top of subpages (ie, 1-, 101-, 201-)? Red, bold thread filesizes displayed near the bottom of subpages?
Something else to consider: separating the board description/rules template from the board- or site-wide announcements. Check out http://0ch.mine.nu/test/read.cgi/jikken/1120050851 to see what I mean.
> Right, I guess it was dumb to mention 0ch/Futaba in the first place. The point is, as you said yourself, tripcodes are a gimmick, and if someone wants to maintain a persistent identity across multiple boards and sites (ie, everyone here with a tripcode), they have no choice but to use ordinary tripcodes. Secure tripcodes are useless because they limit your identity to a single board, supposing each board/site's cipher key is different -- which it should be, since that's the point of having a secure tripcode in the first place. No one should be so paranoid about a tripcode that they'd need to have a different one per board/site.
True, they're of limited usefulness, but people like admins might prefer to use them. And there are certain cases were you might use them temporarily for various purposes. I wrote the code already, so I might as well leave it in. It has some uses at least.
> Shouldn't we sacrifice some backwards compatibility for a more robust and scalable design? It might even be possible to provide an upgrade.pl for old threads.
I think I'm too lazy to do it. It's kind of hairy. Besides, as I said, you can remove a lot of the drawbacks of seprate installations by using symlinks.
ugh "More options..."
too much clickable elements! and it doesn't even do anything (Firefox 1.0.7 here)!
out! out!
sup
The Futaba template is missing the "No File" checkbox next to the File field in the Post New Thread area.
I've returned from the world of the dead, with old forgotten...suggestions! http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1109447905/l50
>-Scaleable administration (ie, [variable permissions for different passwords])
>-Forcenick and/or force anon for [specified IPs]
If you want to have a look at what the code actually does to dig out flaws, here is the current version:
sub sanitize_html($%)
{
my ($html,%tags)=@_;
my (@stack,$clean);
my $entity_re=qr/&(?!\#[0-9]+;|\#x[0-9a-fA-F]+;|amp;)/;
while($html=~/(?:([^<]+)|<([^<>]*)>?)/g)
{
my ($text,$tag)=($1,$2);
if($text)
{
$text=~s/$entity_re/&/g;
$text=~s/>/>/g;
$clean.=$text;
}
else
{
if($tag=~m!^\s*(/?)\s*([a-z0-9_:\-\.]+)(?:\s+(.*?)|)\s*(/?)\s*$!si)
{
my ($closing,$name,$args,$implicit)=($1,lc($2),$3,$4);
if($tags{$name})
{
if($closing)
{
if(grep { $_ eq $name } @stack)
{
my $entry;
do {
$entry=pop @stack;
$clean.="</$entry>";
} until $entry eq $name;
}
}
else
{
my %args;
$args=~s/\s/ /sg;
while($args=~/([a-z0-9_:\-\.]+)(?:\s*=\s*(?:'([^']*?)'|"([^"]*?)"|['"]?([^'" ]*))|)/gi)
{
my ($arg,$value)=(lc($1),defined($2)?$2:defined($3)?$3:$4);
$value=$arg unless defined($value);
my $type=$tags{$name}{args}{$arg};
if($type)
{
my $passes=1;
if($type=~/url/i) { $passes=0 unless $value=~/(?:^$protocol_re:|^[^:]+$)/ }
if($type=~/number/i) { $passes=0 unless $value=~/^[0-9]+$/ }
if($passes)
{
$value=~s/$entity_re/&/g;
if($value=~/"/) { $value="'$value'" }
else { $value="\"$value\"" }
$args{$arg}=$value;
}
}
}
my $cleanargs=join " ",map { "$_=$args{$_}" } keys %args;
$implicit="/" if($tags{$name}{empty});
push @stack,$name unless $implicit;
$clean.="<$name";
$clean.=" $cleanargs" if $cleanargs;
$clean.=" $implicit" if $implicit;
$clean.=">";
}
}
}
}
}
my $entry;
while($entry=pop @stack) { $clean.="</$entry>" }
return $clean;
}>>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). :)
That is an interesting idea, and one that deserves some more thought.
> They can modify it an claim copyright on their modifications, at least as long as they're significant enough, but that doesn't affect existing works in the public domain.
Devil's advocate: What if they make significant changes you would want to add yourself? before you do? Can they then tell you to stop if they license their work first?
> Did you ditch customizable capcodes?
No, I removed the dumbass capcode I put in as a demonstration, because I don't like capcodes.
> Using "◆" as the default tripkey character.
I dunno, I always thought that was a kind of big and annoying symbol. Especially when it's so close visually to the question-mark-in-diamond marker some fonts use for characters they don't support.
> How about placing the Formatting menu to the left or right of the "File: " field? I'd also like to see WakabaMark changed to its real name (Markdown).
The File field is almost never there. Also, WakabaMark is similar to, but not the same as Markdown. There are significant differences that make them incompatible (since Markdown is designed to be used when you know you're using it, but WakabaMark tries as best as it can to not do unexpected things if you don't know about it). I might add optional support for real Markdown at some point.
> In Pseud0ch, post numbers should be the same size/format as the rest of the header text
I tried, and it looked much worse than the current solution. Besides, post numbers in Kareha and 0ch aren't the same, since they're clickable here.
> PS. What's "Raw HTML"?
Pretty useless. I'll probably remove it. It's HTML input without turning newlines into <br/>.
> Oh, and "AA mode" should be changed to "Text art mode"
Maybe just "Text art"... hmm.
The "Entire thread" link in the top navigation bar of the thread page is still broken.
I vote yes, but that is obvious isn't it?
More information on the all threads page, date of the last post? file size?
A quote button that puts >>n and puts the post prefixed by > in the reply box
Different secret strings for different functions (e.g. one for ID generation and one for secure tripcodes)
> The File field is almost never there.
...especially not when I've added a bug that makes it disappear. Where the hell did it go?
PS: I always wanted to say this: The # anchors on the TiddlyWiki automatically scroll me (FF, 1.0.7) just below the actual text box of the entry. Is that a bug, a feature or... ?
> Making them configurable from site to site is really dumb, because it would create an unthinkable usability mess.
Why? Let people figure out things themselves, if they are so keen on changing their keywords. They can get together in their own webmaster threads and figure this out. I don't see why this should be solved here.
Of course I think this is a dumb idea in the first place. Nobody needs to know what fusianasan and sage are. Write a FAQ with two sentences about it and/or let your oldtime users tell newbies. Two frickin' words, and you people talk about it as if it were something like making up a new system of romanization!
> Then why not simply boil it all down to the comment field, with trigger strings for inputting the name, e-mail, sage, ID:Heaven, and fusianasan? You can get a lot more minimal with the current interface.
That's a bit too much. You want to talk about sage and fusianasan in the comment field, not trigger it with it.
I suspect you are joking here, though. Design is about what you can take away and still remain optimal conveniency/efficiency on the user part, not about taking as much away as you are technically capable of.
>The effect would be miniscule in comparison to the huge increase in bandwidth that would result from sending the entire static thread pages.
How about a config.pl parameter to split up thread subpages into X posts per page? The navigation links already use 100 posts per page for practically everything except "Last 50 posts".
Hmm, I just remembered: >> links would not work at all with static pages. Not good.
>Why? Even if 0ch or Futaba implemented secure tripcodes, you wouldn't get the same secure tripcode there as on another board. That's the nature of the security.
Right, I guess it was dumb to mention 0ch/Futaba in the first place. The point is, as you said yourself, tripcodes are a gimmick, and if someone wants to maintain a persistent identity across multiple boards and sites (ie, everyone here with a tripcode), they have no choice but to use ordinary tripcodes. Secure tripcodes are useless because they limit your identity to a single board, supposing each board/site's cipher key is different -- which it should be, since that's the point of having a secure tripcode in the first place. No one should be so paranoid about a tripcode that they'd need to have a different one per board/site.
>Not without doing a lot of changes throughout the code, and not without breaking current installations.
Shouldn't we sacrifice some backwards compatibility for a more robust and scalable design? It might even be possible to provide an upgrade.pl for old threads.
>You could only trigger the functions in a specific format, say...
That's a cool idea, though for now it would have to be left alone if we want to keep Kareha compatible with 2ch/Futaba conventions.
>>195
Exactly. The methods and the effects of saging a thread are separate subjects.
P.S. I recently discovered "rXX-XX" for threads in /soc/. How exactly does this work? From the sound of it, it's supposed to randomize the post order, but when I hit refresh I get the same order.