>>294 Hey I like the new formatting bit. Should it collapse back down if you click away or if you click the "More options..." bit again, like the text box?

Just a thought. This setup is easier and more obvious than using the link field, with "AA" or "Wakabamark". BTW, I just realized that was a pun. Boo! Hiss! Not punny! :)

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

>>182
That's not what I meant. What I meant was: If people want to change keywords to something, let them figure out at appropriate places what this something should be. Whether it should be "down", "stay_down" or "stay_put" is not really a discussion belongs here, not at this point anyway.

> Maybe the thread title should be an l50 link?

That's what I've been saying in >>3!

> If anything, the role of capcodes should be minimized or altogether eradicated, in favor of ninja moderation.

It's up to the administration of the site how to use them. I am advocating that if they are used at all (and yes, there are useful instances for this and yes, these are and should be rare) then it would be helpful to be able to differentiate between site owner/admin/supermod/mod/maid/etc

>> config.pl parameter to permasage after a certain thread filesize/total number of characters has been reached

> Isn't this essentially the same as saying "Please don't talk so much?"

I am not >>208 but the first who suggested this here (long ago). I think it may be vital for future, actually popular boards to limit the filesize of a thread so that the board won't get hammered by repeated loads of whole threads without having to limit the size of posts themselves something fierce.

>>145

>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.

First thought: It would eliminate the concept of sageing as a protest entirely.

> That's what I thought, but then why is it in the Reply pages?

Er, that's a bug I guess.

> 1) rename the RENZOKU constants to something that makes sense

I dunno, they're pretty useless anyway, as has been pointed out, so I don't know if I care enough to change them.

> 2) Have the string to sage and fusianasan defined as a constant in config

I dunno, if different boards use different strings, that will only make for immense confusion.

> 3) A specific string for ID:Heaven instead of anything in the email field

Well, the only string that makes sense is sage, but yes, I should implement the Heaven-on-sage behaviour.

> 4) Cookie preferences such as "Don't use expanding textarea" which leaves it small or big.. or another option for that choice as well; an option to not save Name/Email automatically; anything else that is useful?

Maybe, but I'm not sure it's worth the effort (I'd have to implement a preferences page for it, too).

> Would it maybe make sense to make a separate thread creation page?

Considering that the ratio of users who start new threads to those who don't is pretty small on most message boards, I think it does.
A seperate page could also be used to put a more visible disclaimer/set of rules, as a seperate page with a different layout is likely to generate more attention from the user. Stuff that can be put there also wouldn't clutter up the frontpage.
I don't think this is an urgent matter, though.

Funky, works... I am pretty sure the error has something to do with the characters preceeding the "¦" in the unprocessed tripcode. It begins with a "`"

> The "entire thread" link can easily be changes to link to the files in /res/ instead of going through the script, but that would make it somewhat less convenient when you want to consturct custom URLs, so I haven't done it.

A better solution would be to use mod_rewrite to rewrite all /kareha.pl/$number/ links to /res/$number.html
It schould be a lot faster then running the script and the links stay the same.

What does "fusianasan" mean?

> I don't understand the argument for OH NO ANOTHER BUTTON MY WHOLE LIFE IS RUINNED crowd

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.

> The replacement will be an option to select the default markup for a board, which makes much more sense overall.

I agree, this seems to make the most sense. I understand the "More options..." will not be showing up on boards with fixed settings, so I'll shut my mouth from now on. Apologies to all who I've been bothering.

Oh yeah, regarding the CSS selector: HTML dropdowns aren't styleable, and will look like shit. I'll look into using some other trickery for that, though.

> 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.

I've been meaning to change some of the defaults away from Futaba-style to saner behaviours. Any suggestions for what to change are welcome. So far:

• Pruning set to furthest-back instead of oldest.
• Size limit instead of post number limit, maybe?
• I'll add thread closing to Kareha, but I was thinking of setting the default behaviour to never permasage or close threads.

>>259

Fixed.

>>260-261

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

> I'd like to have the interface reduced to what is absolutely neccessary

That's why there is a "More options..." link, instead of putting the controls there on every single thread everywhere.

How about a function to replace an inappropriate image with a standard image? (aka HelloKitty.gif)

All right, code updated again. This time, some experimenting! I've implemented a tentative system for changing markup types. This needs a bunch of testing, of course, so here's the test thread link once again: http://wakaba.c3.cx/sup/kareha.pl/1099697376/

Thoughts and comments are welcome. I'm still trying to figure out how exactly to do this.

There's a bunch of other changes and fixes too, so mention if anything breaks, as usual. Also, shift-reload!

Also, I forgot to mention: fusianasan works now! Put it in as your name to test it!

> Also, I couldn't be arsed to fix Amber, since it was just a joke in the first place.

Booo!

> who here finds enough use in the auto-expanding comment box to justify the annoyances when you click in or out of it?

I love that feature. Please don't remove it!

> I think the drop-in Style capability is fantastic-- but it just doesn't seem to play nice with the current 2ch page design.

plz 2 be keeping that feature too

> It would eliminate the concept of sageing as a protest entirely.

Except that nobody knows what's going on back-end.

I like the idea though.

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

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

>>249
<a href> opens up the possibility of using inline links, and img tags allow bandwidth leeching from other sites (plus the fact that the image itself may be unsanitary).

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... ?

>>333
The whole point of websites is to implement things without the external application. I don't understand the argument for OH NO ANOTHER BUTTON MY WHOLE LIFE IS RUINNED crowd. If you don't like the extra buttons why don't you remove them with an external application and/or preferences? When you are talking about formating options, a preview makes sense. Are you going to set up your thrid-party application for every configuration of tags supported for every board?

If a feature is of a wide enough audience, it should be included. I'm sure nearly everyone could use a preview every once in a while, whereas something like a Bible quotation functionality would not have wide use.