Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[qwertyuiopas]

A quick mention on the resizing edit box in IE6: It only happens on the plain text editor, not the rich text version, and both toggling the mode and dragging the resize bar will correct it until a character is *added*, although deleting a character does not change anything about it. (Deleting multiple characters at once, though, *does* cause it to jump in size.)

Since IE6-non-wysiwyg editing mode is likely a minority of the users, I'll just continue exploring why it happens on my own. Generated-html and imported javascript are annoyingly hard to work with so far, it seems.

Spoiler: getting further off on a tangent (click to show/hide)

Actually, a theory...

It looks like something is restricting the width of the editor as a whole, to give a nice blank column on either side. However, the editor that gives the problem seems to want to claim 100% of the width of the div what contains the editor, including the columns.

I'm going to continue to work on a limited copy that is just barely advanced enough to show the problem, and then tinker with it to see if I can find a solution or at least probable cause.

Spoiler: Edit, and found a fix, I think (click to show/hide)

The conflict is between the editor style of

Code: [Select]

WIDTH: 100%;And something within the roundframe div class.

It seems to be treating the roundframe, if I understand correctly, as the width that 100% is related to.
On further investigation(mostly accidental, as wordwrap disabled made me, after cutting the textarea's style out into a div around it, and that not working, then while adding it back in, I missed that I left the div with an identical style in, and oddly, it worked...), I can come to a semi-probable-somewhat-conclusion that the textarea, on IE6, reevaluates it's own style only partially when sufficiently modified, and probably disregards padding when finding it's width by percent.

If you have an old copy of IE6, try these two HTML codes. The extra-long style is literally a copy of the one in the .css, so that it doesn't rely on external dependancies. The bolded text makes the difference.

<DIV style="BORDER-RIGHT: #adadad 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 1.2em; BORDER-TOP: #adadad 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 1.2em; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0.5em; MARGIN: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: #adadad 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0.5em; BORDER-BOTTOM: #adadad 1px solid">
<TEXTAREA style="WIDTH: 100%; HEIGHT: 175px"></TEXTAREA>

<DIV style="BORDER-RIGHT: #adadad 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 1.2em; BORDER-TOP: #adadad 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 1.2em; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0.5em; MARGIN: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: #adadad 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0.5em; BORDER-BOTTOM: #adadad 1px solid">
<div style="WIDTH: 100%"><TEXTAREA style="WIDTH: 100%; HEIGHT: 175px"></TEXTAREA>

In fact, there is already a suitable <div> around the textarea, so simply setting it to style="width: 100%" would ensure that IE6 uses that div for sizing of the  plain-text version of the post/modify box.

And, I haven't tested it much, but it might break something on other browsers, so I only reccomend using it if it can be made browser-specific, and then only browsers that are improved by the fix use it, is possible.

[Andir]

Why are you still using IE6 with all the awesome alternatives?  Seems like a lot of work for "sticking" with it.

[Footkerchief]

Why are you still using IE6 with all the awesome alternatives?  Seems like a lot of work for "sticking" with it.

It's a lost cause, don't bother.

[Janus]

I like it and don't really feel the need to rationalize it.  If you don't like it, can't you make an alternate theme for yourself?

What, make an offshoot "Darkling_alt" theme or such? Heh, not really practical. As I said though, if enough people want the avatar back in the top section, I (or more correctly Toady with the proper bit of CSS pointed out) can switch it back; that's fine.

Also, are font sizes getting changed back?

What font sizes? Most of them are the basically same, particularly the important ones. As for "changing them back", not so simple; it would be a matter of tweaking a lot of little font size definitions in CSS and, if you're being particular, then comparing them to the original sizes on a backup of the old forum. Since the default SMF theme change, I already had to tweak the main font sizes to get them back into more appropriate ranges.
That said, the Code block font size will be increased a bit, and if you have any other particulars that really bug you I can see about changing them as well. This is excluding the text in graphical menus which look like the "HOME HELP SEARCH etc." menu, since those require extensive tweaking of the image offsets for any font size changes. Far too troublesome for them.

[Strife26]

Other than earlier listed problems, everything seems fine, although I also miss my avatar in the top corner.

[Rockphed]

Other than earlier listed problems, everything seems fine, although I also miss my avatar in the top corner.

My avatar is in the top corner with a recent firefox and default settings.  The new fonts make my eye bleed, but I still have my little green dragon.

[qwertyuiopas]

Because I prefer IE6 for browsing the DF forums, and am too lazy to open firefox except for sites that don't work otherwise.

Also, I found a fix for the edit box.

There is a <DIV> around the <TEXTAREA [...]</TEXTAREA>, with nothing else within, and no style of any sort.

Changing the opening tag of it to also have style="WIDTH: 100%" seems to make IE6 work fine again.

However, I suspect that some browsers may have an issue with that, so I don't reccomend changing anything unless it can be proven that either it doesn't affect other browsers, or that it can be implemented to only respond to browsers that need it.

If CSS can be conditionally loaded and applied by javascript, script.js already can identify the browser, so it could possibly, if I understand HTML, load a stylesheed that sets that specific div's style only, and maybe that would work.


Actually, I just did a test. There is  already an ie6.css, so if that is a fix file only loaded for IE6, then adding an otherwise empty class to that div, and then setting that class in ie6.css seems to fix it quite well.

Unless it would interfere with the rich text editor... Hmm...
(3 replies happened while I was writing that, as well as frequently testing something that delayed it)

[Strife26]

Other than earlier listed problems, everything seems fine, although I also miss my avatar in the top corner.

My avatar is in the top corner with a recent firefox and default settings.  The new fonts make my eye bleed, but I still have my little green dragon.

Strange, my nice tank isn't there. Are you using Darkling?

[Rockphed]

Other than earlier listed problems, everything seems fine, although I also miss my avatar in the top corner.

My avatar is in the top corner with a recent firefox and default settings.  The new fonts make my eye bleed, but I still have my little green dragon.

Strange, my nice tank isn't there. Are you using Darkling?

I'm using the default style, so here in the default blue/grey area, my avatar exists.  In places with the black background/white text, it does not.

[Locriani]

Very smooth move overall, Toady, Baughn, et al.  Glad to see it's working great and very speedily now!

[Tarran]

I don't mean to push the Ie6 issue any further. But you really need to get with the times, Ie6 is old, and basically everyone but Microsoft is dropping support.

This is why you should upgrade to Ie7.
Why everyone is dropping support, except for Microsoft.

Better yet; grab Ie8 if you want to not have to upgrade again for some time.



I can't force you, but you can't go on with Ie6 forever.



Also; bug, when I get any new post(s) and press preview, it re-displays it them as new post(s), and says a new post(s) was posted. So I could have thousands of copies of the same post(s) just by pressing preview over and over again.

[Kagus]

Tarran, you really don't know what you're bumping into on the IE6 issue...  I heartily recommend you drop it and leave it alone.  That thing got hot enough the first time around...  Wouldn't want to see more people get burned.


Anyways, on the topic of smileys, I must say I'm somewhat biased...  After all, I never use the things.  Like, ever.  My only interaction with them is when I have to remember to turn off an option should I ever want to display an eight inside of parentheses.

Why can't we just use text smileys?  Why should we limit ourselves to the little widgets that are assigned to a set number of emoticons?  We're on a forum for an ASCII game for crying out loud, do we really need graphics support for graemlins (heh, remember when we called them that?)?

Heck, people already use all sorts of variations and types of the things, this would make everything fit in a little better, and it might just allow you to expand your creative abilities by coming up with new or oddball smileys.

[Tarran]

Tarran, you really don't know what you're bumping into on the IE6 issue...  I heartily recommend you drop it and leave it alone.  That thing got hot enough the first time around...  Wouldn't want to see more people get burned.

Reviewing it some time later, I realize I likely should have just ignored it. And I was there when it got hot.

Anyways, on the topic of smileys, I must say I'm somewhat biased...  After all, I never use the things.  Like, ever.  My only interaction with them is when I have to remember to turn off an option should I ever want to display an eight inside of parentheses.

Well, Quite a lot of the rest of the forum does use them.

Why can't we just use text smileys?  Why should we limit ourselves to the little widgets that are assigned to a set number of emoticons?  We're on a forum for an ASCII game for crying out loud, do we really need graphics support for graemlins (heh, remember when we called them that?)?

Because, for forum-goers like me, text emotes just don't cut it, I don't know why, but they just don't.

[Tahin]

Just here to add my vote for dwarf smilies.

[Jackrabbit]

Hell yes to that.