Jump to content

Html Tags


Always & Forever 5
Followers 5

Recommended Posts

Why am I not able to do the same thing when making log entries? Is this possible? If so, what am I doing wrong???

If full HTML were allowed in log entries, someone could write malicious code in a log entry to affect things outside of that entry. Just an example off the top of my head, but they could have the page re-load somewhere else, or pop-up an ad, or probably worse.

Link to comment
The site doesn't allow HTML in logs, but a limited set of BBCodes are allowed. If only Jeremy would publish these someplace  :anitongue:

As far as I can remember, this is what's allowed.

 

As far as I can remember, this is what's allowed. Please report any errors.

 

Bold

Strike-through

Italics

Underline

Color

URL Link

 

Do these still work in the logs? I'm having no luck with the colors...

Link to comment

I have to chime in here. I have been working on a series called A Lesson In Ciphers here in Kansas City and have been adding in links to the other lessons on each cache. Before working on this series, putting HTML into cache pages wasn't much of a problem. Now, it seems that every time I do this, I have to go back through and erase extra stuff being added in after hitting submit, or fixing things that have been erased.

 

For example, I was putting in paragraph breaks and line breaks. Every time it came across on of these, it would put in an extra < br > into the text, adding more blank lines than I wanted. EVERY TIME. If I went back in and erased them...they would be gone.

 

Then I started noticing errors with the links. Earlier this week, I went in to add a link to the seventh in the series to each of the previous caches. I got it working just fine. All links were running smoothly. Today, I went to check on something and found that all of the links were inactive, and it was showing the full line of code. I went back in and found that <a href= had been removed from each link, along with </a> and an extra >. FOR EACH LINK. So I went back through and fixed it. It looked fixed. Then I looked carefully and discovered that somehow, two of the links had been reversed. I know it wasn't that way before. I started going through each of the seven caches and found that three of the seven had # 5 & # 6 reversed, even though I had originally copied and pasted each one from # 1. Then, I found that all seven appeared to have the missing codes. I went back through, took a correct copy of the links and copied it all back in. Now two out of the seven show code. I manually went in and changed them both. Still bad. I went in again on one of them. I can't get this to fix...yet.

 

So, can anyone at Groundspeak figure out why the software is altering the html on it's own, either by adding or subtracting tags? It's really frustrating when I get everything set the way I want it, put it in and hit submit only to find the site is altering it and I have to manually go through and fix it all, sometimes only to have the site do it again.

Link to comment

As for the links, the site has a link parser that changes the links on pages, on the fly. Occasionally, something happens to prevent the parser from running, so links look funny. When this happens DON'T DO ANYTHING. Don't try to fix it. There's nothing to be fixed. You'll just be wasting your time. When the parser comes back on line, the links will look just as they should.

Link to comment

As for the links, the site has a link parser that changes the links on pages, on the fly. Occasionally, something happens to prevent the parser from running, so links look funny. When this happens DON'T DO ANYTHING. Don't try to fix it. There's nothing to be fixed. You'll just be wasting your time. When the parser comes back on line, the links will look just as they should.

Well, unfortunately, I've already fixed the links. However, that might explain the tags, but would that actually change the addresses within the links too? I've never seen this problem before, so it's a bit odd.

 

For weeks now, I've been fighting the system because it is added unnecessary tags into the page. Usually, it's nothing more than <br> tags, but sometimes, it adds others. It spaces everything out oddly and I have to go back in and remove them. Sometimes, it does it every single line, other times it adds them in between paragraphs. Really annoying.

Link to comment

I just found a listing of all the colors that are supposed to be recognized by the "color" BBCode command -- but when I try using them in a cache log only some of them work. When I tried using them here - in this forum post - they worked only when the color command was expressed in the color's hex code value.

 

:rolleyes:

 

~~

aqua #00FFFF

blue #0000FF <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

brown #A52A2A <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

darkblue #00008B

darkgray #A9A9A9

darkgreen #006400

darkorange #FF8C00

darkred #8B0000

fuchsia #FF00FF

gold #FFD700 <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

goldenrod #DAA520

gray #808080

green #008000 <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

grey #808080

lime #00FF00

maroon #800000 <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

navy #000080 <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

olive #808000

orange #FFA500 <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

pink #FFC0CB <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

purple #800080 <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

red #FF0000 <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

silver #C0C0C0

teal #008080 <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

violet #EE82EE <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

white #FFFFFF <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

yellow #FFFF00 <-- this color can be called, by name, in cache logs

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 5
×
×
  • Create New...