Posted By: MohjiveWhy? Users are used to that bbcode works on most forums and I see nothing bad about it.

Most of the time it breaks html formatting thus can provide difficulties for page rendering.
Personally, I don't like another abstraction layers and I prefer anything that produces clean xhtml tags - I don't know exactly if tinymce does that - but if it does - we could benefit from it.

Posted By: MohjiveI'm of a different opinion. Pyramids can be useful, but only to certain extent. Perhaps set the level to 3 or something.

I concur for now. We should see how it turns out to feel later)

Posted By: molfarMost of the time it breaks html formatting thus can provide difficulties for page rendering.

How can it break html formatting? The forum does the conversion between bbcode and (x)html, thus the user never see it (besides when editing the comments). Of course you shouldn't mix and match bbcode and (x)html in the same comment unless you know what you're doing.

Posted By: molfarI prefer anything that produces clean xhtml tags

Surely the bbcode parser can be configured to produce xhtml.

Posted By: molfaras you can see - quoting works, at least for me. might it be the reason that you are expected to choose "html" radio button below?

That is not logical to me. If something, an option in this case, is needed for a function I just used to work properly, that needed option should automatically be enabled. So here's a downside with html-only, as it is implemented today, you have to actively check 'Html' if you want the quotes to work. That should be done automatically (if needed, as it is with html quoting)

Posted By: molfarit allows to enter any html code for demonstration purposes without actually doing any formatting. It may be useful later when you have any discussions on topics like HTML, Javascript, XML etc.

But then you can't use quoting in the case you don't want to format your comment, like in the examples you gave. And that's bad imo.

may be a valid point. it seems that current html parser allows for such a misuse.
however, It is quite possible, that with a special toolbar - there won't be a need for another HTML formatter like we have now. thus, the users will still be allowed to use only specific tags, as admin decides. that's why I recommend to test it.
if that fails - well, your point would be more than valid and I will concur for moving to BBCcodes.

edit: btw, some evil tags may be disabled in this formatter we have now as well. at least there should be such a feature.

A toolbar wouldn't do anything to stop people using whatever they liked. The HTML parser can strip out tags; at the moment, it disallows:
$Html_DisallowedTags = array('link', 'iframe', 'frame', 'frameset', 'object',
'param', 'embed', 'style', 'applet', 'meta', 'layer', 'import', 'xml', 'script', 'body',
'html', 'head', 'title', 'ilayer', 'blink', 'marquee', 'font');
It also bans inline styles. You can only make links to https?/ftp/news/nntp/mailto URLs, so no script injections. There's no guarantee that it's perfect at doing all of that, of course, so it might still be something to think about.

Other than that, I guess we have to rely on people not using code stupidly. If they do, we can (and I will) edit their posts to take it out, and it's possible to take the ability to use HTML away from specific users if it becomes necessary too.

On Jonas' point, I will in the next couple of days add a formatter that does exactly that in the plaintext, which could well be acceptable. I am adapting the code to a formatting system I have deployed elsewhere that was designed with the aim of being unnoticeable when viewed as plain text.

Posted By: vazub But any level of abstraction in general is prone to future misbehavior.

You must live a strange life. Avoiding abstractions and all. But seriously that's not really true. Get a really inexperience programmer to program a pong clone one in c and one in python and see which one is screwed up more.

As much as I don't like BBCode, now I tend to concur. We can try at least. There should be relevant addons on the main Vanilla site.

Ok, bumping this *again* as we now have a bug with html quoting, see http://forum.gobolinux.org/?CommentID=691. Another issue is that one can't combine URLs and quoting, because for URLs to be detected one has to post as "text", which obviously doesn't work with html quoting.

Yes, if you look at the html code you can see that an extra <cite> tag is inserted at the beginning of your comment, but it's not visible in the edit field.

It's on my to-do list. The BBCode extension claims not to work with recent Vanilla versions, but that's probably fixable if there is a problem. I will hopefully get on that tomorrow. The "quote" links probably won't work with it, though.

Just seen that, very good indeed. Btw, how can you put a name in the quote tag?

Ehm...I know how to put it with html, but I'd like to know if there's a way with bbcode too :D

Posted By: Mohjivesame as with html, but you use [ and ] instead of < and >

Thank you very much :P

Posted By: giddieAnd you use "quote" instead of "blockquote", by the looks of it:

[quote][cite]Posted By: Mohjive[/cite] same as with html, but you use [ and ] instead of < and >[/quote]

The quote part was known to me, as I frequent some other forums, but I was used to the common [quote=somebody] style.

P.S.: There could be a way to use bbcode and html *at the same time*? It'd be the best.

Btw I noticed the default quote button still uses html. This sounds weird, I'd find more appropriate for it to use the default user's choice, to prevent errors in the posting.

EDIT: just read your message :D