 | | Re: What I made from the 4099 Robobots Designer Set
|
|
(...) Yeah! These are nice! Dang fleebnorks ruin everything! stuart (21 years ago, 1-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish.photography, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: // and ** vs {} and [] (was: testing in rtl...)
|
|
(...) Can't speak for Mozilla, but OEQuotefix doesn't react on the above line (or any other of Brian's suggestions), it seems to only process special characters at the beginning, and ending, of a word, and does nothing if special chars overlap, like (...) (21 years ago, 1-Jun-03, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: New Gear Boxes and Motor Systems
|
|
(...) Links in FTX require an opening < and closing >. Todd, perhaps you could turn on the same "www." and "(URL) recognition that plain text uses for FTX? Some sort of hard character return recognition would be nice too...I'm not in the habit of (...) (21 years ago, 31-May-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: // and ** vs {} and [] (was: testing in rtl...)
|
|
(...) Oh I agree that // and ** are potentially more troublesome than {} and [] in normal text -- and that's why {} and [] were chosen instead. But I think the "troublesome" part may be entirely solveable from a coding standpoint. (...) It depends. (...) (21 years ago, 31-May-03, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing FTX for discussion groups
|
|
(...) Hey, it gives me an 'é'! Cool! Two problems though: it's harder to remember 0233 than 'café', and I often work from a laptop, where the numeric keypad functionality is awkward (or maybe I've just never got used to it.) I'll force myself to use (...) (21 years ago, 31-May-03, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: // and ** vs {} and [] (was: testing in rtl...)
|
|
(...) I'm not sure what your above comment has to do with FTX supporting non-word aligned positions for the formatting characters, no matter which character set is used. I was attempting to point out that // and ** would seem to be more troublesome (...) (21 years ago, 31-May-03, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | FTX Feature Request
|
|
Todd - In FTX, can you add a feature for strikeout text? Perhaps -text- ?? Thanks! -Tim (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing FTX for discussion groups
|
|
(...) My bad. Sorry about that. (...) I guess I have always seen the codes above 127 referred to as the 'Extended ASCII' set. Perhaps that's neither accurate nor official. Still... I'm really enjoying the results of these changes. All the best! (...) (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: // and ** vs {} and [] (was: testing in rtl...)
|
|
(...) If // and ** proved superior to {} and [], then going back and removing {} and [] (and of course automatically converting existing pages to // and **) would certainly be an option. (...) But it's only an issue under one obscure set of (...) (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: // and ** vs {} and [] (was: testing in rtl...)
|
|
(...) Since you don't think most of the above are problems because they are not on word boandaries, how do you reconcile that with FTX's support for bolding, italicizing, or underlining part of a word, such as in the example in the FTX quick start (...) (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing FTX for discussion groups
|
|
(...) I agree (smiling). If you have scroll, of course, to read the reply, then it means that someone didn't prune the quoted text like they should have. --Todd (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing FTX for discussion groups
|
|
(...) Yes it did. BTW thanks for all the continued effort... I really like the abiltiy to format (etc...) the posts now. SteveB (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing FTX for discussion groups
|
|
... (...) Scrolling sucks! (he says smiling) (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing FTX for discussion groups
|
|
(...) BTW, just to double-check... It did show you a big huge yellow and red message box on the preview page explaining this, yes? --Todd (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing FTX for discussion groups
|
|
(...) Good! That's where your replies belongs in a threaded discussion. (...) Not if you trim irrelevant portions of the reply correctly. (...) Top-posting is a fine thing for non-threaded discussions, especially where the recipient list changes (...) (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: // and ** vs {} and [] (was: testing in rtl...)
|
|
(...) That's what I used to think too -- but I'm not so sure anymore... (...) the double slash and (2) the http: prefix. (...) I've never seen anyone write anything like that before. But in any case, it's got two leading slashes instead of one. (...) (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing FTX for discussion groups
|
|
(...) Please note that the above chart is not an ASCII chart. ASCII character codes range from 0 to 127 and nothing else. What the chart shows is the ISO-8859-1 (Latin1) character set. But it's not even correct at that, because 128 through 159 are (...) (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing FTX for discussion groups
|
|
Yikes! I just posted a reply and all my text was moved to the bottom of the message! Oy! Sure it makes it easy to read when the only message you read, in a thread, is the last one. But if you read the replies as the come in then you're forced to (...) (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing FTX for discussion groups
|
|
(...) AFAIK, it's a Windows thing. In DOS, you didn't have to type the leading 0. --Todd (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Announcing FTX for discussion groups
|
|
(...) Richie, what happens when you press Alt+0233 (type the 0233 on the numeric keypad)? --Todd (22 years ago, 30-May-03, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
