|
Luc Pattyn wrote: qnd try providing some proof.
Suggest me how to provide a proof for this one! 
Hmmm... a short video emailed to Chris?
|
|
|
|
|
This article is missing at least one closing tag. I would edit it myself, but the author has prevented anyone but editors/admins from doing so.
Convert WPF to XPS[^]
BTW, I think it might be a good idea to disallow authors from being able to prevent editing by other users if their author points are below gold level..45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
| I think you're right. I've fixed the formatting Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
Need to implement HTML encoding while displaying Messages as it is breaking the page if some scripts are there.
Check this[^]message, it is getting redirected to a blank page with voting bar only.
|
|
|
|
|
| It's loading fine for me. A lot of HTML is blocked from messages by design due to abuse. IIRC supported tags are done via a whitelist. 3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Oops! CPHog was the culprit. The page will render properly if it's disabled.
But please verify the Search Message Posts page. It seems to break there.
|
|
|
|
|
| I didn't see anything obviously wrong when i did a search a few seconds ago. 3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
What happened to the modified time stamp and subject?
I just edited a message in this forum (just a small typo) and noticed the [modified] in the subject didn't appear and the time stamp in the body wasn't there neither.
Bug? or was it removed on purpose?
[Edit]Seems to have sorted itself out, was a one time thing apparently so ignore this  [/Edit]modified on Wednesday, March 17, 2010 6:39 AM
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on how long ago the original post was.
For example, you post and immediately see a typo, you can edit it and re-post without incurring the wrath of the Modified Pixie, but leave it 20 mins and try it, the modified flag will be fluttering.
Testing Modification.------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
modified on Wednesday, March 17, 2010 6:16 AM
|
|
|
|
|
I edited after more than an hour so...
I know there is a period where it doesn't appear but after an hour it should appear.
Testing modificationmodified on Wednesday, March 17, 2010 6:36 AM
|
|
|
|
|
| See Above, I modified and got the Modified and Timestamp. ------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
Weird tested with mine and works aswell but I'm absolutly certain I edited this[^] post after more than an hour and it didn't get it.
Granted it was a very minor edit but when I edited my previous reply to you I got the timestamp and Modified subject directly.
|
|
|
|
|
I think if you leave the site, or post another essage before editing, you will get the modified label, even if it's within a certain timeframe..45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
It takes a couple of minutes between first post and edit for the "modified" marks to be applied; that is how it works most of the time. However it isn't reliable, for the last several months I estimate a 10% probability of edits to slip through without being marked "modified". I've seen that happen dozens of times already, and I add "[Edited]" or "[Modified]" by hand when appropriate.
My best guess is there is a caching issue involved, while creation and modification are occurring on different servers.
|
|
|
|
|
Here's what happens:
A member X on server A views a list of messages. These messages are then cached on server A. Another member Y on server B views a list of messages. These messages are then cached on server B.
Member Y edits a message on server B. The message is updated, the cache on server B is invalidated and updated, and member Y see's the latest message.
Member X, however, sees the old data if he is on server A. He sees the new data if he is on server B. For the sake of efficiency we do not check every message of every forum to see if it has been edited and whether it should be thrown out and recached. Instead, we cache for only 5 mins or so, meaning member A could potentially hop between different servers and see different things.
Member Y, however, will always see the latest. When he goes to server A he carries with him info on what he changed and so his appearance on server A will trigger a cache invalidation and he, and everyone else on server A, will now see updated information.cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for that.
It is kind of what I was expecting; the "When he goes to server A he carries with him info on what he changed and so..." part is interesting.
I happen to recall two occasions, both Lounge IIRC, where I edited a message several hours after I created it and didn't get a "modified" mark; does that mean I wasn't recognized, maybe my dynamic IP had changed?
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: I happen to recall two occasions, both Lounge IIRC, where I edited a message several hours after I created it and didn't get a "modified" mark; does that mean I wasn't recognized, maybe my dynamic IP had changed?
Was this recently or a few weeks ago? A few weeks ago there was definitely an error in the parser that was causing it to not catch these things.
If it was recent then it could be that you are seeing client-side caching (which we made more aggressive). An full non-cached refresh would have showed the modified tag. However - you would be able to tell beccause when you edited the post the modified tag would have been injected into the subject and message just before you edited, so you would have seen it. If you didn't see the modified tag while editing the question then it's a bug, plain and simple, because no caching occurs there.
Maybe you should just hit Ctrl+F5? :Pcheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Was this recently or a few weeks ago?
That was a while ago. I'll keep an eye on things and report if I see it again.
Chris Maunder wrote: Maybe you should just hit Ctrl+F5? :P
Yeah, it's the wear on those keys that forces me to replace my laptop every so often.
|
|
|
|
|
 cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: If you didn't see the modified tag while editing the question then it's a bug, plain and simple, because no caching occurs there.
I guess we have a bug then. See my original message here.
I edited this[^] message about 1 hour after I posted it (changed a 's' to a 'd' so very minor edit) but when I was editing it I noticed the [Modified] tags in subject weren't there, I figured they'd show up on posting but didn't. So I posted the bug report. But when Dalek Dave told me it was working for him I tested again with message from this thread and then it worked as well for me.
I forgot to check what server I was on, if it happens again I'll check it.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris,
here[^] is a recent conversation where the OP ended by adding "SOLVED" to the subject line, and a solution to the message, while no "modified at..." sentence is to be seen.
|
|
|
|
|
Today morning i found that total reputation has been added as few were suggesting.
Though a little confusion on it, couldn't find it in Reputation FAQ either. How is the total reputation level decided? Like a member having 11000 points is GOLD or SILVER on what basis. I believe there must be some sort of chart range for this too. Right?modified on Wednesday, March 17, 2010 3:55 AM
|
|
|
|
|
The color codes are in the FAQ, except for the total color; that one is new; I know platinum starts below 10K.
|
|
|
|
|
The new(total rep) one is missing for now. Want to know that one only if published somewhere!
Luc Pattyn wrote: I know platinum starts below 10K.
It doesn't look like Platinum starts below 10K... i have 12K and i am still a GOLD!
|
|
|
|
|
I have 8631 and I'm silver so I guess it goes something like:
2500+ = bronze (just a wild guess here )
5000+ = silver
10000+ = gold
15000+ = platinum (another one of those wild guesses could be 20k as well )
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
