|
observation from an outsider: confusion exists. "Edited" has different semantics to different people (and maybe also over time). Maybe there is too much state. Quite likely whatever state exists isn't sufficiently visible all in one place.
Personally I would like to see the "who is allowed to edit" choice (present in the Article Wizard) also visible in the article's header (with clarification who is editor: the CP editors? others too?)
|
|
|
|
|
I think I know what's causing the confusion. Chris authorized certain users with the ability to directly post edited articles. Means when they use the wizard the article by default will have the edited status set. John's recent articles, that he submitted himself through the wizard, are all set to edited without him doing anything.
But this edited status is only available to editors. But for new articles it doesn't matter since it's set to Edited automatically (for certain authors only).
This particular article is old and when John submitted it, he didn't have the direct submission permissions yet and so its edited status is set to unedited. Now only an editor can reset it to edited.
Chris or Sean should be able to confirm this.
|
|
|
|
|
I tend to agree, however, even your message is a bit ambiguous if not bizarre:
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: Now only an editor can reset it to edited.
using "editor" without clarifying if that is "anyone who can edit" or "CP staff editor". I favor short sentences with a person and a verb in there, "owner can edit", "staff has edited", things like that. With only a noun or verb, different people tend to read different meanings.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: I tend to agree, however, even your message is a bit ambiguous if not bizarre:
Oh ok, sorry about that. I've always used the word Editor to mean someone with CP editing rights. In the past that used to be volunteer editors, and now it's primarily staff. I should have been clearer about that.
|
|
|
|
|
Correct
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Chris. Good to know I guessed right
|
|
|
|
|
It's still in the unedited section. You should be able to select a sub-section - since you've done it for some of your other articles.
|
|
|
|
|
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: It's still in the unedited section. You should be able to select a sub-section - since you've done it for some of your other articles.
I already selected a subsection for it (Hardware). I don't know why it's still in the Unedited section, given that it's marked as "Edited".
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: I don't know why it's still in the Unedited section, given that it's marked as "Edited".
It shows as unedited - both the article and also in the listing.
|
|
|
|
|
When I go to edit the article, the Status field says "Edited".
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: When I go to edit the article, the Status field says "Edited".
I believe that when you originally submitted this article you didn't have rights to directly choose a sub-section. Later on Chris gave you those rights and thus your newer articles don't have this issue.
During the last update of the article system, something changed so that now there seems to be an edited-flag that's only accessible to CP editors. So for this particular article, one of the editors will have to switch that flag for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Ewington wrote: Are you sure? What about this little guy?
Build Your Own NAS Device[^]
Not sure about that - maybe he didn't pick a sub-section for it.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep - "Hardware". Could be a site bug (or one that was around when I originally posted the article).
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTW... nice game! 
|
|
|
|
|
Is there any functionality on CP that allows us to share files privately between users?
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
maybe you could create a collaborative unfinished article, and upload/download some ZIP files to/from it? I'd expect all co-authors would be able to access the files.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah - that worked well the last time I tried it.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
but this time I added a little twist: you name the team members explicitly, by making them co-authors. I've never done that, but if it doesn't do what you want, how could people co-author an article at all?
|
|
|
|
|
That might work, but then I'd have another article that I can't delete.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
I just remembered, there is also a "collaborative group" account, which I would guess is a single account shared by several people. You'd have to create one for each combination of people you're interested in. Again, not from my own experience.
BTW: don't modify your regular account, I remember some problems were reported when you change its type.
PS: If you care for an experiment, I'm willing to help out.
|
|
|
|
|
There is the 'Uploads' system that is in place for platinum members (see top right, next to 'Sign out' - if it's not there then I can open that up a little)
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Can other users download from your uploads?
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
I uploaded a kitten image the other day, see here[^].
And I just uploaded a ZIP for your experimental purposes, see here: "/script/Membership/Uploads/648011/JSOPtest.zip"
BTW: as these are my uploads I expect you can download/read/use them (assuming you know the exact URL), but not modify/delete them. So it may not be the perfect solution for real collaboration.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. the purpose of uploads is specifically to give you a place to share files.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
