>>70

?

> Personally, I find the reverse order listing, as well as the random order listing, to be a bit silly & useless.

Well, no, duh, that's the point. They're jokes.

> The only useful bonus feature here seems to be the comma range seperator, but it seems even in that case there is not much benefit to it (saves 1-3 links in the average case that it is needed, which is rare to begin with).

On the contrary, it's very useful when referring someone to a specific discussion in a thread where several discussions are going on, since you can make a link that only shows the relevant posts. Not just on the board but when linking to threads elsewhere.

| stays |

Also, wouldn't making capcodes even more prevalent be considered A Bad Thing®? If anything, the role of capcodes should be minimized or altogether eradicated, in favor of ninja moderation.

Another question: would FUDGE_BLOCKQUOTES be considered deprecated by now, or are there still CSS styles out there that require it?

> The Title field should go above the Name and Link fields in 2ch mode.

Why should it?

> From every practical standpoint, the current solution in Kareha is a lot more convenient

It's more convenient if you want to start a new thread, but for those who don't it's one more form to have to scroll by.

> Futaba now uses "..." instead of ">>>" to prefix repy blocks.

Any idea why?

>>86

>Why should it?

Because it's one of the two requirements for creating a new thread, and it's a lot more important to have a well-defined topic than to fill in your name.

>It's more convenient if you want to start a new thread, but for those who don't it's one more form to have to scroll by.

Good point.

>Any idea why?

I dunno. I guess it's just another one of Futaba's countless layout quirks.

>>249 Then the default should be no markup.

>>180

The one with encoded Javascript that makes you post with fusianasan is cute.

I'll sign that partition for a separate admin script and XHTML interface (one that includes the banning, board nuking, and spamlist-changing functions in Wakaba).

How about adding flexibility to the DELETE_FIRST option in config.pl, using booleans to define when to keep or remove a thread (including AND/OR/NOT arguments)?

Also, options for both automated permasaging and pruning by postcount, creation date/time, and board position (all configurable in config.pl of course).

Some other layout points:

• The Title field should go above the Name and Link fields in 2ch mode.

• 2ch's "new thread" post box is at the bottom of the main page. From every practical standpoint, the current solution in Kareha is a lot more convenient, but you may want to go over that just in case.

• Futaba now uses "..." instead of ">>>" to prefix repy blocks.

huh?

Text Art's description about auto-linking URLs and >> references is redundant. Not a bad solution with the layout, though (hiding the menu behind "More options..." still bugs me).

At least i got 350

> He meant saging a thread just because a part of the actual e-mail address contains the word "sage."
> You know, like [email protected].

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.

>>108
fusianasan is a voluntary function to show identity without having to memorize a tripcode. Works on all boards. Reveals your IP, of course...

Another feature I'd like is keyboard shortcuts like Wikipedia. Although you'd have to avoid stuff like Alt-D.

Oops, forgot to link the first point to my original thread: http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1127326007

Oh, and see if dmpk2k is willing to port over the proxy detection and load-balancing/distributed server cluster functions to Kareha. Those would be neat.

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"?

>>177

> It's not worth comparing until it doesn't break regularly.

The only problem with it is that it doesn't do paranoid file writes. The fact that the entire server occasionally breaks isn't related to how broken the script itself is.

>>232
Nothing! But since mode_image's footer.html includes a link to Futaba called "Futaba mode," I think mode_message should have the same.

>>9
That's an option, you pick which one you want.

>>236

mode_image copies the Futaba/Futallaby HTML style and uses the same CSS, so yeah, it should be, and no, it won't be.

>>238

This would need writing to yet another file, and it also makes it less obvious how to get the same secret on several boards.

So, I made the All threads page a lot fancier. Might need some shift-reloading to get the proper CSS.

Is this about done, besides the admin bit? I'm getting a bit tired and distractions are looming to the left and right.

Here's a fun little game for you all!

I'm looking into adding support for using HTML markup in addition to WakabaMark, but since most boards use XHTML, I can't just let through any old HTML, and most people can't write well-formed XHTML. Also, I don't want any cross-site scripting going on. So I've tried to write a piece of code that takes any horribly written piece of HTML, sanitizes it by removing all tags and attributes that are not an approved list, checks the attribute values, and turns it into well-formed XML.

Now I'd like to see if anyone can break this. The objective is to get some Javascript onto the page, or making the page break in Firefox (or any other browser that parses XML strictly), or otherwise causing trouble. Have at it!

http://wakaba.c3.cx/test/sanitize.pl

Well, a lot of machines run on x86 these days, so that covers a lot of it. And you could pre-compile for a couple of other architectures, and have it pretty much covered. Linux and unixes in general make it ridiculously hard to distribute binaries, as opposed to Windows or Mac OS, but it's still possible with a bit of trickery. Avoiding dynamic libraries helps a lot.

>>244

Er, that's a feature, not a bug. That's how most GUIs act.

How come this is now the by far biggest thread on this board?

Maybe it's because I'm posting useless replies like this one!

> Does the CSS selector -really- get in your way?
> Is having the More options thing really ruining your experience,

Yes and yes and I already stated why.

I am sure you know this but text markup takes place on a whole different level than identification/bumping issues. Your comment about pgp signatures is very funny but I will not honour it with a comment.

> Does the CSS selector -really- get in your way?
> Is having the More options thing really ruining your experience,

Yes and yes and I already stated why.

I am sure you know this but text markup takes place on a whole different level than identification/bumping issues. Your comment about pgp signatures is very funny but I will not honour it with a comment.

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.

>>20
"|" is not "¦"