|
They are replaced. What you are seeing is browser caching. Hit Ctrl + F5 to force your browser to download the new images you uploaded.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: They are replaced.
Lol I thought they were not, now I have a few files ( jpg files ) uploaded because of this. It looks bad to have so many of them wasting space.
May be as you said I can just send a mail with the file names.
Thanks. 
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All/Chris,
Just an observation. I hope you keep an eye out for a possible [resolution].
When I paste code, the paste happens immediately but then the CodeProject page (under IE 6) becomes unresponsive for 30 second to 1 minute. Depending where I paste into the article the time is lessened. That is, if I paste at the beginning of the article, the stall time is usually maximum. Pasting at the end of the article results in shorter stall times.
It appears the HTML editor is a client side control. So I'm kind of surprised at the times. This machine is not lacking - dual 1 GHz processors with 1.5 GB RAM running Windows 2000 Professional.
This leads me to beleive there is somethin awry with the parsing algorithm (I assume the pasted text is being reparsed).
Finally, to keep things in perspective, the article is about 30 printed pages. I don't have metrics for short articles - I don't think I've ever written one under about 20 pages.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
What's happening is that when you paste, the scripts pull apart the HTML you are pasting and strip out all the bad stuff - script, unneeded tags, the crud Word puts in, broken attributes etc - and then puts it all back together neatly. Try going to code view (click the <> button at the far right), messing up the formatting, going back to design mode, then back to code view. You'll see the HTML all neatened up again.
What I need to do is have a "reformat HTML on paste" checkbox in the editor...
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
Chris Maunder wrote: ... the crud Word puts in
I've always called it bloat (and used Bloatware to described FrontPage, Office, and the like).
I think I like Crudware better
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
Chris Maunder wrote: and then puts it all back together neatly.
This is worth mentioning. Suppose I want to apply some basic formatting such as an indentation using 3 non breaking spaces (HTML code). I would hand encode .
When the editor performs it's reparse, I've noticed it will remove that formatting.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
I don't know what you changed, but paste is lightning fast (first test today). I am at the end of the article (in which case - disregard).
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
You'll are probably wishing I did not have an extended weekend now...
When submitting code through the web, the preview does not display the grachics content correct - the Red 'X' place holder is displayed.
Interesting the artcle edits fine before that step, and previews fine once submitted (after a Modify operation).
I _think_ the offending page is http://www.codeproject.com/script/submit/PreviewArticle.asp
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Yep - this is a known bug.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
Chris Maunder wrote: Yep - this is a known bug.
Whoops - in that case, disregard my squeaks...
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
No - squeaks are good. We're having a meeting about the wizard wednesday so it's good to be reminded.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
In My Humble Opinion...
Change the checkbox 'Mark Article as Editied' to Minor Revision. Or perhaps use a pair of radio buttuns to toggle between Minor and Major Revision. Minor Revision should be default. Show Major Revisions on 'Last 10 Updates', and allow minor revisions to silent pass.
If the CodeProject implements Suggestion: Subscribing to Article[^], then those who take a deeper interest in an article will be notified when the minor revision has occured.
I think this will cut down on the articles flying by 'Last 10 Updates'.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
There is a "Mark this as an update" checkbox that you can uncheck to allow the article to be updated without fanfare.
Article subscriptions are definitely going to happen
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
Another suggestion as I am winding up for another article: Drafts. Currently, article submission through the web is an all or nothing proposition. I'd like a staging area for works in progress. This way, as I'm writing sample code, I won't miss details that seem to lead to the many revisions early on after the submission.
A secondary benefit could be a personal review area. I would like to be able to invite someone (providing the article path and a temporary password) to review the article. This would also work well for reviewers of non-English speaking countries - a staging for a grammatical review. I know that this has been discussed previously on the board.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey Walton wrote: Currently, article submission through the web is an all or nothing proposition
I write my articles up in Frontpage before I post it.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Colin,
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: I write my articles up in Frontpage before I post it.
I got so disgusted with Front Page bloat I did away with it. I also hated how it wanted to create all the hidden folders for control purposes.
So, I moved to OpenOffice (which was very similar to FP). Next I tried all the WYSIWYG Web editors on SorceForge and FreshMeat (very low quality indeed!!!). Then I tried about half a dozen free trials, including Adobe Go Live (it is not ready for Prime Time).
I finally settled on Namo's Web Editor. It is a bit buggy, but it seems to be the lesser of the evils for me.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey Walton wrote: I got so disgusted with Front Page bloat I did away with it.
I dunno... FrontPage 2003 is pretty good if you just want to use it as a basic HTML editor with spell check. Otherwise, I'd just use Visual Studio.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey Walton wrote: I'd like a staging area for works in progress.
You have made some really good suggestions lately, so I'm assuming that I don't understand what your intention is with this suggestion - it seems either trivial, or you mean something else and I just don't get it. I mean, I see that you use UltraEdit - so do I, and to see what the article looks like, I just hit the toolbar button that displays it in the browser (I keep images in the appropriate subdirectory, so they also appear in the browser). I keep doing that until the article is finished, and then I hit Ctrl-K, which spell-checks it within UltraEdit. If you use the Article Submission Wizard, you can change the article yourself if you notice some mistakes. So why do you think that some "staging area" on CP would be helpful? What would that gain you, over what I have just described?
Jeffrey Walton wrote: A secondary benefit could be a personal review area.
Now this is an interesting idea. I have used my personal upload area on CP to upload what I call "betas" of article updates (and announce the availability in the article forum), but having a "Beta version" button on the article page would be cool.
|
|
|
|
|
Would it be helpful if we marked an article as "In Progress" and only you would be able to view it? Once you're happy with it you could update it as "Available" and everyone would then see it.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Would it be helpful if we marked an article as "In Progress"
I personally would not use that feature, since I do my editing and previewing from my local HD, as I described above. It seems to me there are other site features that would be much more useful - article subscription, beta articles, a code snippets section, reorganizing along the lines of frameworks rather than language, etc. IMHO.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
Chris Maunder wrote: Would it be helpful if we marked an article as "In Progress" and only you would be able to view it? Once you're happy with it you could update it as "Available" and everyone would then see it.
That is basically the gist of it.
As I metioned iwth Hans, I think it boils down to two points:
1) I prefer the online composing versus offline composing and then uploading
2) I really like the CodeProject Web based HTML Editor. It has some quirks, but I can live with them.
Currently my choices for HTML Editors can be divided into two catagories:
1) Bloatware (FrontPage, OpenOffice)
2) Broken or Crippled (Namo, which I use, is one of these)
In the end, I desire good old Adobe PageMill. I wish I hasd my old copy. It may be HTML 2.0 or 3.0 compliant, but it is perfect for what I need to do.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Hans,
Hans Dietrich wrote: You have made some really good suggestions lately, so I'm assuming that I don't understand what your intention is with this suggestion - it seems either trivial, or you mean something else and I just don't get it.
I think it is the former (something trivial) - I prefer online composing rather than offline. With offline composition, I have to maintain an HTML editor. I don't claim I hand code my HTML - I will hand clean HTML as required. But I really don't like HTML coding in general (is HTML still considered a Programming Language?).
The CodeProject has one of the nicer HTML Editors (and it is web based to boot). So, I'd like to start an article, perhaps walk away, then continue later.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I understand. Have you looked at the HTML editor features in UltraEdit?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I think (IMHO) it may be a good idea to allow a reader to subscribe to articles. Items to be notified of would be Article Updates and Comments Added.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
