At 10/4/06 10:02 PM, madknt wrote: you can gaurentee people will still try to use BB CODE.
idiots.
Then we get to laugh at them and feel superior.
I used to be relevant.
Aids
5,449 Views | 65 Replies
Hey! Here's an idea! Take a leaf out CSS Zen Garden's book and let users upload their own CCS for the site!!
At 10/4/06 10:03 PM, liljim wrote:At 10/4/06 09:59 PM, BigScizot wrote: Hey Jim, just a quick question. Why didn't you post this as a news topic?Because it's not really news and really only affects the bbs, rather than the rest of the community, who probably couldn't care less.
But the only people who read the news, generally post in the BBS.
At 10/4/06 10:02 PM, madknt wrote: you can gaurentee people will still try to use BB CODE.
idiots.
So you don't want to feel all high and mighty, as we laugh at those people?
At 10/4/06 10:03 PM, C41um wrote: No sneek peek at the re-design, then?
Filler text.
Because this space needs to be bigger than it already should be.
Jigen made this sig. madknt downsized it to fit the filesize limit. Go team.
At 10/4/06 10:07 PM, MojoTheHelperMonkey wrote: Um...oops jew! I thought you said something about installing new fonts for the forum, instead of just Arial. I guess this is only updating html shit.
Fonts are decided upon by the end-user's browser. Arial comes bundled with most users' computers, let alone what they install for themselves. Any fonts that you see that are not arial in the forums, or in any other area of the site are most likely compiled within images (which aren't text, surprise, surprise).
So your suggestion about fonts is relatively assinine, given that all users who browse the forums would have to have that font on their machine, rather than there being "new fonts for the forum", which would only appear for those who have those fonts on their machine.
Kirk-cocaine: As for the nested lists... Not sure what you mean. <ul> is usually for un-ordered lists and <ol> is usually for ordered lists. You can apply stylesheets to both.
At 10/4/06 10:21 PM, liljim wrote: Kirk-cocaine: As for the nested lists... Not sure what you mean.
Lists within lists, James!
I.E: (underscore equals space, silly BBS auto format! :P)
<ul>
___<li>text</li>
___<li>text text</li>
______<ul>
_________<li>text</li>
______</ul>
___<li>text text text</li>
</ul>
When I do that I looks fine in IE/FF/etc but the W3 validator gives me all sorts of error messages. And it's just not me, all my class-mates have the same error, I don't think my lecturer knows what the fuck he is doing ;P
At 10/4/06 10:31 PM, Kirk-Cocaine wrote:At 10/4/06 10:21 PM, liljim wrote: Kirk-cocaine: As for the nested lists... Not sure what you mean.Lists within lists, James!
I.E: (underscore equals space, silly BBS auto format! :P)
<ul>
___<li>text</li>
___<li>text text</li>
______<ul>
_________<li>text</li>
______</ul>
___<li>text text text</li>
</ul>
When I do that I looks fine in IE/FF/etc but the W3 validator gives me all sorts of error messages. And it's just not me, all my class-mates have the same error, I don't think my lecturer knows what the fuck he is doing ;P
Here's your problem:
That second, inner <ul> tag needs to be inside <li> tags itself. Your example should look like this instead:
<ul>
___<li>text</li>
___<li>text text</li>
___<li>
______<ul>
_________<li>text</li>
______</ul>
___</li>
___<li>text text text</li>
</ul>
That should validate just fine.
How about new post icons? A sad face is desperately needed.
I can't wait to see the next-generation angry face.
At 10/4/06 09:49 PM, liljim wrote: We should probably think about dribbling that stuff into the current design, but whatever.
I don't see a point with the new layout so close at hand.
Audio / Forum / Games & Movies Moderator. Flag stolen content, don't be a dingus.
Bring back the blank posts you tooswork.
Nah, pretty cool, it allways pissed me off to no end, especially when wanting to insert links mid-text. I mean bold or italics (face it, who really even uses underline ever?) are quite simple really, but links are a pain. I do like typing them out though, but hen it's mid text, it's no fun.
bring back the blank posts, please!
At 10/5/06 07:11 PM, liljim wrote: Dangerous talk! But yeah, the angry face is going to change.
So will it be über sexy?
Filler text.
Because this space needs to be bigger than it already should be.
Jigen made this sig. madknt downsized it to fit the filesize limit. Go team.
At 10/5/06 08:19 PM, liljim wrote:At 10/5/06 07:25 PM, Tannerite wrote: So will it be über sexy?I'm sure people will find faults with it, just because they don't like change... But yes, it looks great.
What's so wrong with giving people a sneak-peak? If Stamper can do it, then so can you.
At 10/5/06 08:21 PM, ArabFreak wrote: What's so wrong with giving people a sneak-peak? If Stamper can do it, then so can you.
Stamper gave you a tiny screenshot of what's to come. He'd never give anything away with respect to how things look in any detail and nor will I.
At 10/5/06 08:22 PM, liljim wrote:At 10/5/06 08:21 PM, ArabFreak wrote: What's so wrong with giving people a sneak-peak? If Stamper can do it, then so can you.Stamper gave you a tiny screenshot of what's to come. He'd never give anything away with respect to how things look in any detail and nor will I.
Link plz
At 10/5/06 08:26 PM, complete wrote: Link plz
At 10/5/06 08:22 PM, liljim wrote: Stamper gave you a tiny screenshot of what's to come. He'd never give anything away with respect to how things look in any detail and nor will I.
Well give us a tiny screenshot as well.
Or else.
