Loading Profile...
Support for code and complex urls in topics and replies
Hi. I would like to see support for code and complex urls in topics and replies.
Often we are dealing with a fairly technical topic with a user and it would be a great deal easier to place code samples in the reply. Also, complex urls like this:
http://www.google.com/ig/directory?sy...
dont display properly...
Is there any plan to support this in the future?
Often we are dealing with a fairly technical topic with a user and it would be a great deal easier to place code samples in the reply. Also, complex urls like this:
http://www.google.com/ig/directory?sy...
dont display properly...
Is there any plan to support this in the future?
3
people like this idea
I like this idea!
Tell me when this idea gets some attention.
The more people who like this idea, the more it gets noticed.
The more people who like this idea, the more it gets noticed.
The company implemented this idea.
-
Inappropriate?Hi christo,
Yes! We definitely plan to support a carefully selected set of formatting tools in topics and replies. Tools for adding links and code are top of our list for our users and for ourselves.
That said, you don't have to wait: even though we don't say so, some HTML is allowed, so you can use an <a> element to display a complex url, and <code> to format your code snippets right now. This is just a stopgap, and a bit of an Easter egg bonus feature. The real tool is on its way.
I’m thankful for actionable feedback
-
Inappropriate?Also, I've just checked in code to handle urls that embed other urls in their query strings, so you should get the auto-link-and-truncate support after the next deploy (probably sometime tonight)
-
-
Inappropriate?Just to note, looking at our code right now, you cant actuall embed the code tags, yet.
-
Inappropriate?Please add good support for 'pre' or 'code' tags. I have lots of code snippets I'd like to properly format. Right now it looks nutty when either pre or code tags are used.
1 person thinks
this is one of the best points
-
Inappropriate?Looks like this is not much improved after 3months.
I notice I can wrap code with a <code> block, but it makes some odd decisions and tries to reformat the code. It's not pretty. The only thing that seemed to work was to convert all angle brackets to html entities -- but only the most desperate are going to muck around with that.
The best code snippet options I've seen are through http://stackoverflow.com/ -- they use a Markdown approach to content.
As it is, we can't really support developers through GetSatisfaction -- although I imagine its a great solution for end users.
I’m undecided
-
Inappropriate?I would also like to vote on this issue...pasting XML, even inside the "code" tag, strips out all attributes. Which results in customers asking me for this: http://getsatisfaction.com/balsamiq/t...
A simple escape of the text within a code tag would do no?
I’m eager to see this fixed
1 Comment Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
Hey Peldi -- Just noticed your reply. Sorry I missed it before. I'll get someone to weigh in. -
Inappropriate?9 months on... Has there been any traction on this feature request? Just looking for some sort of update on progress -- even if its "we will not support this feature".
Thanks.
I’m undecided
-
Inappropriate?Here's how i get around it:
I go here:
http://js2go.com/site/js2go/apps/html...
paste my code in click encode, that gives you the htmlentities version.
Then I just paste that between <pre> tags. Seems to work for the most part
-
Inappropriate?Hi Modius,
We actually allow code and pre tags now... have for a while. I just forgot to update this topic, sorry about that. You can also see from the original topic post that the url is correctly being recognized.
As far as doing an auto-escape on pasted html. We currently don't have that capability since we leverage html to use for formatting. We've got two different paths we are considering: First, we might move away from direct html support and then we will auto-escape code samples for you, or Secondly we might improve our parser to peer inside of pre and code tags to do the auto-escape. Neither of those are on the near timeline though.
I'm going to mark this topic as implemented, but I recommend starting another idea regarding how you best think we should improve the formatting.
EMPLOYEE
