+BooDogMama Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Things that have been tried ... and failed ... and have been removed (after input from the geocaching community): From the Geocaching Blog dated August 19, 2011 https://www.geocaching.com/blog/2011/08/geocaching-challenges-thanks-for-the-feedback/ I recall going to the Geocaching Block Party on August 20, 2011 and talking to Jeremy about "Challenges" (And I wasn't the only one!) Then, later this appeared: From the Geocaching Website: http://www.geocaching.com/challenges/default.aspx Check out this statement on this page: On an office wall here at HQ is a sign that reads, "Let's make better mistakes tomorrow." By accepting that we will sometimes get it wrong, we can allow ourselves to learn from and imagine new opportunities in the world of Geocaching. Perhaps there is hope that Markdown will be gone soon ... Or some of the suggestions will be implemented regarding logs created or edited before Feb 2, 2016 (that they would be displayed as they were originally created)! Quote Link to comment
+palmetto Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 My thanks for tackling the numbered list problem. Quote Link to comment
+thebruce0 Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Just spotted a log where "don't" appears twice in the text, and all the text between the apostrophes is code monospaced. Quote Link to comment
+AnnaMoritz Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 (edited) Markdown uses backticks for code. If you use apostrophe instead like in "I don't" this won't happen. I also noticed a log in German with backtics instead of apostrophe, I didn't excpect that people use backtick/grave instead of '. Nevertheless it seems favorable to restrict supported Markdown to exactly what is listed in 'how to format'. List it there or don't support it. As rethink + and - for unordered lists, * is enough and _ and __ for italics/bold as * and ** seems enough. Edited February 10, 2016 by AnnaMoritz Quote Link to comment
+SidAndBob Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 couple of days ago I wrote: even worse. i always started my found log with the found number followed by a ".". e.g. <<1869.>> now this is rendered as a line number and only partially like <<1.>> and all following text is indented. not what i asked for, not what i intended. completely readable text on every platform is now made unreadable because of markup. can at least nubers, say, above 10, just be rendered as they are, without interpretation and clipping as line/paragraph numbers? see this log. Miraculously, this situation now has improved. lognumbers like 1869. are rendered today as I intended them, just like 1869. A first step in adjusting Markdown to the geocacher's needs? I don't understand why ordered or unordered lists are enabled in Groundspeak markdown. They add no value in caching logs. I'd love to know in a year's time how many logs use them. My guess is almost none (apart for a few people testing they work). Quote Link to comment
+Gill & Tony Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Is it possible to bold part of a word? S**park**s is displayed as-is, instead of Sparks. Some challenges involve finding caches with words in the title and it was useful to highlight the word in colour when listing the qualifying caches. That doesn't work any more, so I tried bolding the word and that works fine in a standalone word, but not when embedded in the middle of a longer word. Quote Link to comment
+niraD Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Nevertheless it seems favorable to restrict supported Markdown to exactly what is listed in 'how to format'. List it there or don't support it.Better yet, assume logs are plain text unless markdown has been specifically enabled by the user. Quote Link to comment
+EngPhil Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) Better yet, assume logs are plain text unless markdown has been specifically enabled by the user. ...there, I fixed the emphasis for you. Edited February 11, 2016 by EngPhil Quote Link to comment
+thebruce0 Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 That point can never be repeated too much. Of all the discussion about this process, that's one of the the simplest, most user-friendly solutions that still moves ahead with Markdown implementation. And the concept has already been used in cache listing descriptions. Logs are already stored as plaintext. Add one flag that tells 1st party GC sources whether to render as Markdown, and lets API apps decide whether to show the log as plaintext or make use of GS's Markdown implementation. Minimal coding impact. One extra bit field in the logs table. RenderAsMarkdown. bam. Default on, even, but make it an option. Quote Link to comment
+niraD Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 That point can never be repeated too much.If you say so... Better yet, assume logs are plain text unless markdown has been specifically enabled by the user. ...there, I fixed the emphasis for you. Quote Link to comment
+AnnaMoritz Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Why is it neccessary to support also more sophisticated Markdown like This is fine for writing web articles that show all links as footnotes in the raw text. But that affects also logs that never were meant for markdown. No one can guess what exactly is/is not supported - only them who had a closer look at what various implementations of Markdown do, can suspect which old logs containing ()[]-+*_>`. and blanks etc. are affected and adjust them. Please restrict Markdown to what is shown in 'How to Format' and/or let users choose marking their logs as Markdown/Plaintext. Now some have discovered not all colors are gone, one is left, green and start using ">" and other elements only for decorating their logs as no other way is left to center text and have other colors than black (and blue for links). If only quotes were simple text between "" ... Quote Link to comment
+SidAndBob Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 There are only two kinds of people in this world. 1. Those who understand Markdown. 1. And those who don't. Quote Link to comment
+SidAndBob Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Is it possible to bold part of a word? S**park**s is displayed as-is, instead of Sparks. Some challenges involve finding caches with words in the title and it was useful to highlight the word in colour when listing the qualifying caches. That doesn't work any more, so I tried bolding the word and that works fine in a standalone word, but not when embedded in the middle of a longer word. This is possible in vanilla markdown, but Groundspeak have adapted it so this can't be done. You must have a white space or "punctuation mark" (currently .,?;: or !) at the beginning and end of the emphasis. This is so you can have things like {*FTF*} in a log I believe. Quote Link to comment
+noncentric Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Is it possible to bold part of a word? S**park**s is displayed as-is, instead of Sparks. I'm pretty sure your only option is to have spaces before/after the part you want bolded. Entering text as: S **park** s Appears in log as: S park s Not ideal, but there are other ways to identify the qualifying word within a cache name. For example, the qualifying word could just be noted at the end of the cache entry. The challenge cache CO's don't typically require that they be shown as bolded text. For example: 10/10/2015 | GC12345 | This cache creates Sparks | park This is possible in vanilla markdown, but Groundspeak have adapted it so this can't be done. You must have a white space or "punctuation mark" (currently .,?;: or !) at the beginning and end of the emphasis. This is so you can have things like {*FTF*} in a log I believe. HiddenGnome provided reasoning in post #179. The reason was not to accommodate the {*FTF*} tag. It was stated earlier in this thread that the API partners that used such tags to identify FTF's would still see the original text the finder entered into their log and so those API partners would still be able to count the FTF finds correctly. If a partner counted FTF's based on {*FTF*}, then they still would've counted the FTF's if those logs appeared on geocaching.com as {FTF}. Am I missing something, then? Because when I'm in the latest version of GSAK (851B64) and enter S*W*A*G into a log and do a preview, I see SWA*G as a result. The API is providing the RAW text so renderings outside of geocaching.com are partner specific. By default, the Markdown specification allows the ability to add bold and italics in the middle of words so the example that you provided would be expected. However, the rendering on geocaching.com has been modified to only support bold and italics surrounding a word in order to avoid unexpected behavior with "*" and "_", especially in the case of events and usernames. Quote Link to comment
+thebruce0 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 The API is providing the RAW text so renderings outside of geocaching.com are partner specific. By default, the Markdown specification allows the ability to add bold and italics in the middle of words so the example that you provided would be expected. However, the rendering on geocaching.com has been modified to only support bold and italics surrounding a word in order to avoid unexpected behavior with "*" and "_", especially in the case of events and usernames. And this is a good reason why I suggested that the API provide an option to retrieve the log formatted with Groundspeak Markdown syntax. Without that, there is no guarantee that the log, if designed to look a certain way by its user, will actually look that way wherever the log appears. All the Markdown issues that were fixed up in GS's implementation will get botched again by any third party implementing Markdown without those GS customizations. The API should provide both a RAW log option, and a pre-formatted option using GS's syntax (sending at least HTML formatting to start) so API partners can reliably display log text as the user intended it to be formatted while composing. Quote Link to comment
+_Waldmenschen_ Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Not pretty Yep. That's my objection in a nutshell. Those who only log TFTC (or object to being asked to write even that much) won't care. I try to contribute in the form of logs that people actually enjoy reading. Ugly detracts from that. Edward For logs people wrote last month or last year, barely anybody would ever notice the raw formatting codes. Yeah sure some get read, but the majority of logs read are very likely only the most recent. Very few logs I've seen make any extensive use of formatting, so if I came across a few random bold or red or whatever format tags, it's unlikely to detract from the experience of the reader. Going forward, the markdown syntax gives you pretty much everything you had before, so you can still write elaborate formatted logs if you desire. I don't disagree that a way to keep legacy logs looking the way they do would be preferred, but if that's not in the plan then not much is lost. 06/Jun/2013 Der[green] Alte[/green] schaut auf jeden Fall, dasses klappt [navy]ATTENDMÄßIG[/navy] und achtet darauf, dass die [red] bUNTe HosE[/red] zu dem Zeitpunkt [green]NETgRAD[/green] in der Waesche is! Die [purple]BOIME sind BÄrReiz[/purple] frisch [/u]geFällt [bReNnHol[/i]z], haben aBeR duRCh ebenDieSe TaUfrIScHe Erntung deN entscheidenDeN NACHtEIl der [navy]üBermÄßiGeN raUcHEntwicKLung. [/navy] DeR EventOwner sEi deshalb [red]aNGeHalTen [/red] unter DeN aTTri-Puten DaS ENtsPreChenDe LOgO > [brown](“GaSMaskE reQuestEd“)[/brown] zU SetZen [red] SOwiE iM[/red] vOrfeLD EntsprechenDe vErhAndLunGEn mit DEm loKalen FeuER [navy]wEHR [koMMandanTen][/navy] zu fÜHreN.. WiR WeRdeN voRRauSSichtlicH [navy]dURch uNserE stiMMungsvoLLe BeFeuerunG [/b][/b][/navy] ZEicHen produZIEreN, diE Bis in die [orange]hEiLige CiTY[/orange] von neUMarKt zU seHen [red]SINdT! P.s.: [/red]Auf DEM EVenT [green]muss IM [red]Extrem[/red][/b]faLL [/green] mit dem vORRüBergeHEnden [red]ER[/red]Scheinen aN:dEerEr, BZw. WeITerer MIT[brown]GlieDEr[/brown] dEr WALdMenSchen[blue]SiPPe[/blue] GerEChneT WerdEn. (([red]eiN GEwiSses grUnd[/red]LegenDes InTereSse beSteHt jedEN[/red]faLLs.))- BLeiBt nur NOcH Die FRaGe Wo Wir DeNn unSereN WEiNVorRaT [navy]füR Das wOchEnEnDe[/navy] dePoniErEn kÖnnEn. > ??? (oHne deN geHen wiR SchließLich net aUS’M Haus) BiS deNne, [purple] wErd [red]scho[blue]W[/blue]eRn[orange] !!! [/orange][/u][/size][/size] //[/b] Abdeckplanen? – hmmm. Ein paar qm sollten doch irgendwo rumflaggen. Quote Link to comment
+Viajero Perdido Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 If you can't say it with content, say it with form. Quote Link to comment
+_Waldmenschen_ Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 Quote: "Geocaching is a game of love. When a cache owner cares tenderly for her geocache, that’s love. When a father takes his son out geocaching for the first time, that’s love too." I did put a lot of LOVE in my logs (not to mention the time!). They were to me like a piece of art. And now Groundspeak tells me, nobody cares about old logs anyway, they are rubbish and are regarded that way (by them!). But not by me! I DO care about old logs, the ones I wrote and the ones I´ve received as a cache owner. Somebody wrote that logs should be the crown jewels of the community. I agree. And I never ever dreamt (or better:nightmared) that they would be swept into the dustbin overnight! What comes next? Destroying my listings that are written in HTML and expecting me to fix them? Thank you, Groundspeak, and happy Valentine! Quote Link to comment
+Blinky Bill Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 Quote: "Geocaching is a game of love. When a cache owner cares tenderly for her geocache, that’s love. When a father takes his son out geocaching for the first time, that’s love too." I did put a lot of LOVE in my logs (not to mention the time!). They were to me like a piece of art. And now Groundspeak tells me, nobody cares about old logs anyway, they are rubbish and are regarded that way (by them!). But not by me! I DO care about old logs, the ones I wrote and the ones I´ve received as a cache owner. Somebody wrote that logs should be the crown jewels of the community. I agree. And I never ever dreamt (or better:nightmared) that they would be swept into the dustbin overnight! What comes next? Destroying my listings that are written in HTML and expecting me to fix them? Thank you, Groundspeak, and happy Valentine! We DO care about our (old) logs too and want to have back the old way of formatting with HTML. MarkDown is insufficient and the implementation of that junk was the biggest foolishness GS ever did. At least GS could have started a survey and asking their members what they want - GS is living by its members, don't forget that issue. Thanks GS - great job Quote Link to comment
+lodgebarn Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 Quote: "Geocaching is a game of love. When a cache owner cares tenderly for her geocache, that’s love. When a father takes his son out geocaching for the first time, that’s love too." I did put a lot of LOVE in my logs (not to mention the time!). They were to me like a piece of art. And now Groundspeak tells me, nobody cares about old logs anyway, they are rubbish and are regarded that way (by them!). But not by me! I DO care about old logs, the ones I wrote and the ones I´ve received as a cache owner. Somebody wrote that logs should be the crown jewels of the community. I agree. And I never ever dreamt (or better:nightmared) that they would be swept into the dustbin overnight! What comes next? Destroying my listings that are written in HTML and expecting me to fix them? Thank you, Groundspeak, and happy Valentine! We DO care about our (old) logs too and want to have back the old way of formatting with HTML. MarkDown is insufficient and the implementation of that junk was the biggest foolishness GS ever did. At least GS could have started a survey and asking their members what they want - GS is living by its members, don't forget that issue. Thanks GS - great job An admirable summing up. Markdown is ok in its place e.g. .md files on git hub where the usage is explicit. Here it seems just plain wrong and most of the so called compatibility is fools gold especially where more and more exceptions are added to the rules. Quote Link to comment
+pxlobo Posted February 14, 2016 Share Posted February 14, 2016 Quote: "Geocaching is a game of love. When a cache owner cares tenderly for her geocache, that's love. When a father takes his son out geocaching for the first time, that's love too." I did put a lot of LOVE in my logs (not to mention the time!). They were to me like a piece of art. And now Groundspeak tells me, nobody cares about old logs anyway, they are rubbish and are regarded that way (by them!). But not by me! I DO care about old logs, the ones I wrote and the ones I´ve received as a cache owner. Somebody wrote that logs should be the crown jewels of the community. I agree. And I never ever dreamt (or better:nightmared) that they would be swept into the dustbin overnight! What comes next? Destroying my listings that are written in HTML and expecting me to fix them? Thank you, Groundspeak, and happy Valentine! The problem, the issue here is called RESPECT. Respect for the written content and users. Respect that this organization, unfortunately does not have anymore !!! Quote Link to comment
+lingbeek Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 I DO care about old logs too and want to have back the old way of formatting with HTML and UBB! MarkDown is insufficient and the implementation of that junk was the biggest foolishness GS ever did. At least GS could have started a survey and asking their members what they want - GS is living by its members, don't forget that issue. I am Someone who has written over 15000 logs with the majority of them using UBB... Someone who has created many caches... Some of them even required the use of HTML in logs (Yes I archived a cache because of Markdown) I think the way the site is now is a nightmare... Everywhere you see bold text.... It looks so silly... And groundspeaks makes alll of it''s serious cachers look silly because there logs look like a piece of shot now... Sorry... But that''s how I feel aout this change... It is not one for the better... All efoort previously made to place certain text in bold or italics or quotes.... Everying.... gone... UBB is so much better then Markdown... And all 3rd party programs understand UBB.... Markdown is not understood.... Quote Link to comment
+niraD Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 UBB is so much better then Markdown...Agreed. For one thing, using UBB must be intentional. But plain text logs can trigger markdown rendering unintentionally. Quote Link to comment
+Pontiac_CZ Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) True. But the more time passes by the more I think this is one of the few good changes Groundspeak ever introduced. In the past many times I saw logs using colors and/or obscure fonts, they were sort of visually breaking the logs flow on the cache page and were not so pleasant to read. I believe fancy formatting should go to listings only. The experiences geocachers share in their logs should focus on the content, not the form. And remember e-mail notifications with tons of UBB code in them, that was really annoying to read. But I'd rather see Groundspeak invest their time and money into fixing things, like the map with occasionally-unclickable icons etc. Edited February 16, 2016 by Pontiac_CZ Quote Link to comment
cezanne Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 The experiences geocachers share in their logs should focus on the content, not the form. I think it's quite subjective whether one prefers bold and italics or colors to emphasize. Moreover in my opionion the change that links that are copied and pasted into logs are no longer hyperlinked (in old and new logs alike) is the worst change possible. Readings logs in e-mails directly by the way is not very recommendable anyway as many cachers (myself for example) often change them quite heavily after having sent them away (I might add quite a lot and make many changes in particular for multi parted logs). Quote Link to comment
+lodgebarn Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 UBB is so much better then Markdown...Agreed. For one thing, using UBB must be intentional. But plain text logs can trigger markdown rendering unintentionally. Definitely markdown ONLY WORKS if it is explicitly specified as such rather than assuming anything I write has to be markdown which is a load of nonsense. Quote Link to comment
+thomfre Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 After testing Project-GC's tool for identifying logs that need conversion (http://project-gc.com/Tools/MarkdownIncompatibleLogs), I see that I have 5469 logs (~50% of my logs) that needs conversion. That's a lot for me to convert! But even worse, I saw that a lot of my logs on various challenge cahces now have been destroyed by markdown - like listing of dates, they are now numbered as a ordered list. We don't write dates differently here in Norway, so 23. mars is perfectly normal for us to write, and we don't want that to suddenly turn into 1. Mmrs when we save... I cannot understand how this can be interpreted as something else than a bug. You're not only changing the formatting, but you're changing the content itself. I don't mind you formatting it as a list, but please don't change the value. Quote Link to comment
+Pontiac_CZ Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I agree, this has to be fixed, changing the content instead of the format only is a serious bug! Quote Link to comment
cezanne Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 After testing Project-GC's tool for identifying logs that need conversion (http://project-gc.com/Tools/MarkdownIncompatibleLogs), I see that I have 5469 logs (~50% of my logs) that needs conversion. That's a lot for me to convert! But even worse, I saw that a lot of my logs on various challenge cahces now have been destroyed by markdown - like listing of dates, they are now numbered as a ordered list. We don't write dates differently here in Norway, so 23. mars is perfectly normal for us to write, and we don't want that to suddenly turn into 1. Mmrs when we save... I cannot understand how this can be interpreted as something else than a bug. You're not only changing the formatting, but you're changing the content itself. I don't mind you formatting it as a list, but please don't change the value. Are you sure that the logs really are affected? I vaguely recall that this problem with ordered lists has been fixed, but of course the tool provided by project-gc will not be aware of this. Quote Link to comment
+thomfre Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Are you sure that the logs really are affected? I vaguely recall that this problem with ordered lists has been fixed, but of course the tool provided by project-gc will not be aware of this. Yes, I'm reading my logs on geocaching.com, not on Project-GC. If it was fixed, it's broken again now :/ Quote Link to comment
+AnnaMoritz Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Are you sure that the logs really are affected? I vaguely recall that this problem with ordered lists has been fixed, but of course the tool provided by project-gc will not be aware of this. Yes, I'm reading my logs on geocaching.com, not on Project-GC. If it was fixed, it's broken again now :/ Can you give an example (link)? Quote Link to comment
+lodgebarn Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Are you sure that the logs really are affected? I vaguely recall that this problem with ordered lists has been fixed, but of course the tool provided by project-gc will not be aware of this. Yes, I'm reading my logs on geocaching.com, not on Project-GC. If it was fixed, it's broken again now :/ Because it is not a great plan to have non-standard standards so nobody knows what is going on. Quote Link to comment
+thomfre Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Because it is not a great plan to have non-standard standards so nobody knows what is going on. Not a great plan to alter content either. Especially not content of older logs. Quote Link to comment
+lodgebarn Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Because it is not a great plan to have non-standard standards so nobody knows what is going on. Not a great plan to alter content either. Especially not content of older logs. Well I am not modifying any of my old logs for sure. Quote Link to comment
+Viajero Perdido Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Hmm... If third-party apps end up supporting all of [uBB, HTML, MarkDown] - like at least one app developer I'm aware of - while Groundspeak still only supports Markdown, I wonder if that'll mean less app sales for Groundspeak. I wonder if they thought of that. Quote Link to comment
+bmps2003 Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Hello When i saw this changes i could not believe... i like make a good log, and usually had some smiles, colours and changes in the text, even links for other logs, tracks etc... When i saw in foruns what was the problem i really was sad, and i will not change almost 7000 logs in BBCODE/HTML that i have... i am true sorry about owners that will see logs like this right now, and for other geocachers that could read my story ou reach some help in the log... it was not my fault.. I hope REALLY that this situation can reverse, makes possible all kind of log/ Markdown/BB/ HTML, or GS convert all logs (are a really small % as as written, so can do it, i will not do). Best Regards bmps2003 Portugal Quote Link to comment
+EngPhil Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 If third-party apps end up supporting all of [uBB, HTML, MarkDown] - like at least one app developer I'm aware of - while Groundspeak still only supports Markdown, I wonder if that'll mean less app sales for Groundspeak. Indeed, perhaps it'll lead people to look further afield and realise there are much better offerings out there.... certainly the geocaching.com website is a last resort for me nowadays, and I can't remember the last time I fired up a Groundspeak app.... Quote Link to comment
+baer2006 Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 06/Jun/2013 Der[green] Alte[/green] schaut auf jeden Fall, dasses klappt [navy]ATTENDMÄßIG[/navy] und achtet darauf, dass die [red] ................. :blink: ! Logs like these are the reason why I'm in favor of the change, even if the options for meaningful formatting (as opposed to wild font-and-color shenanigans) are now rather limited. Quote Link to comment
cezanne Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 My thanks for tackling the numbered list problem. The issue is back and without any sort of announcement that they changed it back. Things really get frustrating. Quote Link to comment
+AnnaMoritz Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 (edited) My thanks for tackling the numbered list problem. The issue is back and without any sort of announcement that they changed it back. Things really get frustrating. It seems to me that this issue is back only for cases where a line starts with "1." eg. 1. Februar (1.) 3. Februar (3.) 5. Februar (5.) get's 1. Februar (1.) 2. Februar (3.) 3. Februar (5.) but 2. Februar Day 2 3. Februar Day 3 5. Februar Day 5 stays as written. Two line breaks after 1. "break" an ordered list and all other lines starting with number-dot-blank are "save". But how to escape 1. Februar from being interpreted as first entry in an ordered list? Escaping with ` `1.` Februar helps, but does that make sense? Edited February 17, 2016 by AnnaMoritz Quote Link to comment
+Marchwood Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) Is this a Markdown problem or not? It has occurred around the same time. Using Firefox browser 44.0.2 I can no longer see any photos on cache pages or in logs. I can upload a photo but I have to go into IE to see it and edit it. Edited February 18, 2016 by Marchwood Quote Link to comment
+noncentric Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) Is this a Markdown problem or not? It has occurred around the same time. Using Firefox browser 44.0.2 I can no longer see any photos on cache pages or in logs. I can upload a photo but I have to go into IE to see it and edit it. I don't think that's related to Markdown. I'm also using Firefox 44.0.2 and have no trouble viewing photos on cache pages or in logs. Just checked, and I can see photos. You may want to post this problem in the Website subforum and see if others are having the same issue and/or have a solution for you. ETA: Added link to Website subforum. Edited February 18, 2016 by noncentric Quote Link to comment
cezanne Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Two line breaks after 1. "break" an ordered list and all other lines starting with number-dot-blank are "save". But how to escape 1. Februar from being interpreted as first entry in an ordered list? Escaping with ` `1.` Februar helps, but does that make sense? In my opinion, it does not. I'd like to be able to write text logs that can be used at all platforms where a cache is crosslisted and none of the other sites uses this strange Markdown thing. Moreover, they all display links as hyperlinks and I do not want to use Markdown syntax for links as then the logs do not work on other sites. What's very ironic about the whole issue is that hyperlinks still work in logs for waymarks. If they area really considered as security risk, it makes no difference whether the servers end up with problems due to geocaching or due to Waymarking (at Waymarking not only hyperlinks work, it's also still possible to use bb code in logs). Quote Link to comment
+Mr. Waldo Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 Feels like the cat is chasing it's tail to me. Quote Link to comment
+lingbeek Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 For me the results of the Project-GC incompatible logs tool...... A total of 1299 log entries found that have BBCode or HTML in them. Of those log entries, there are 11 that may be incompatible with the conversion tool. Well.... I am not rewriting almost 1300 logs..... How difficult would it be to simply make some automatic converts for the colors/bold/italics in UBB...?? Why this change... And the 3.5 percent is for sure not valid in the Netherland... A simple look at a few cache pages and you can see that about 20-25% of the people use UBB..... AAARGH... All of my cachelistings I own are now ugly! Quote Link to comment
+AnnaMoritz Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 If a log contains a < and no > the converter "It looks like your log contains HTML" now suggests the following converting: word1 <word2 word3 word4 word5 word6 word7 to word1 Why is < treated like 'this is the end, cut log here and delete what comes after <? And why does the converter suggest word1 <word2 word3 word4 word5> word6 word7 to be converted to word1 word6 word7 That seems very unfortunate to me, no one could expect/anticipate such behavior and it isn't easy to see what happens if the log is long. One could think that a converter might suggest deleting <!-- and everything that follows (until a -- is found or the log ends), but < ? word1 <!-- word2 word3 --> word4 word5 word6 and word1 <!-- word2 word3 word4 word5 word6 on the other hand are changed to word1 word2 word3 word4 word5 word6 Strange. Quote Link to comment
+NiPPe14 Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 (edited) thousands of logs that looks [bad]. feels like the account is ruined. logging a cache is not fun anymore. lots of html code and my fish that I have used in a the last years logs used to look like this ¸.·´¯`·.´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸><(((º> and now looks like ¸.·´¯·.´¯·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸><a href="(((º" rel="nofollow">(((º</a> or ¸.·´¯·.´¯·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸><(((º> Edited March 5, 2016 by Keystone flushed potty language Quote Link to comment
+Target. Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 After I noticed some markdown bugs in gsak i looked for more i found some strange markdown to html conversion on geocaching.com When trying the unordered list i fund some strange result in the log editor. The bug are described in the described in the images and the log text are below the image The log text is included below the image A blank line between to second level unordered list element will have a strange effect on the surrounding lines but works fine on the first level * level 1 unordered list * level 1 unordered list * level 1 unordered list * level 2 unordered list * level 2 unordered list * level 2 unordered list * level 1 unordered list Correct list * 0 space before * * 1 space before * * 1 space before * The 1 space will have a space before the 1 if the next line have more the 4 space before* * 0 space before * * 1 space before * * 5 space before * If there are more then 11 space before the * on the last line it will not be interpreterad as a list * 0 space before * * 1 space before * * 12 space before * Quote Link to comment
+Arne1 Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 Wisiwyg editor ? Nonsens for user who mahe logs via fieldnotes ! Assuming that you're not currently formatting HTML or UBB using your GPS or cellphone, the changeover to Markdown would not affect your plain text field note logs. Why not ? Quote Link to comment
+nannibella Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 (edited) I DO care about old logs too and want to have back the old way of formatting with HTML and UBB! MarkDown is insufficient and the implementation of that junk was the biggest foolishness GS ever did. At least GS could have started a survey and asking their members what they want - GS is living by its members, don't forget that issue. I think the way the site is now is a nightmare... Everywhere you see bold text.... It looks so silly... And groundspeaks makes alll of it''s serious cachers look silly because there logs look like a piece of shot now... Sorry... But that''s how I feel aout this change... It is not one for the better... All efoort previously made to place certain text in bold or italics or quotes.... Everying.... gone... Thank you. I agree with every single word of that post. Everything gone. Edited March 26, 2016 by nannibella Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.