locked
[bb] code RRS feed

  • Question

  • Subject says it all- many experierenced forum users of other systems are used to it, and the html editor is clunky at best.
    Thursday, February 21, 2008 8:41 PM

All replies

  • the revised editor looks and works much better, the BB codes are really quite simple and are supported by the editor directly with the exception of codes like [whisper] which rely on features not in this system ( personal messaging ).

    it's kinda comfy to set the wayback machine and [b]markup[/b] all old school, but I don't see much utility in it.

    do you have specific BB codes in mind or just a parallel way to create markup?
    you should read more
    Friday, February 22, 2008 4:16 AM
  • There are many people that will be in these forums who are use to the other forums that are out there, which for the most part have made [bb] code a standard. I think the RTE is clumsy, and I will type in raw HTML before I use it
    Friday, February 22, 2008 11:49 PM
  • How many people would want to use BB codes instead of just html? If there's a lot of interest we'll see what's involved to add it, but it feels like HTML gives all this an more. Can you explain how BB codes would work better than just using HTML?
    Forums Product Planner, Andrew.Brenner at Microsoft.com
    Thursday, April 3, 2008 4:57 PM
  • Testing embedded <b>html codes</b>. Do they <i>work</i>?
    You may be only one person in the world, but you may also be the world to one person.

    I guess not.
    Saturday, April 5, 2008 3:30 PM
  • Are you in html mode? The editor starts in text, there's a toggle to html in the bottom right corner.
    Monday, April 7, 2008 2:35 PM
  • Testing embedded html codes . Do they work ?
    You may be only one person in the world, but you may also be the world to one person.

    Nope, was in text, NOT html. HTML mode works as advertised. Interesting, so will we now have to deal with embedded links to spam sites and other html 'tricks'?
    Monday, April 7, 2008 3:17 PM
  • The key advantage of BB code over HTML is that the formatting details are handled for you -- with HTML you have to micro-manage it, and everyone does it differently, so it becomes inconsistent.

    BB codes can evaluate to a whole set of HTML code at runtime, which can be tweaked by the forum admin to conform to the forum style, providing a great consistency among threads.

    One example is [quote] -- that will automatically generate the appropriate, and consistent 'quote' HTML code around the quoted text, so that everyone's looks the same, and users don't have to worry about the low-level HTML details.

    Another useful thing is [code] -- the stuff in the [code] [/code] block automatically gets formatted as chosen by the forum administrators -- so everyones looks the same.

    Allowing people to enter raw HTML in the post just creates a great inconsistency among posts -- there's no real reason why HTML should be used here -- we're not making websites, we're making posts/articles.

    This is the same reason Wikis don't use raw HTML, you have the special Wiki tags/syntax that gets translated into HTML code at view-time. Once again, this provides consistency, and allows the wiki author to tweak the style of the HTML that is generated from the wiki code.

    Allowing raw HTML allows someone to write something like <font size="100">Some big text</font> and create a major annoyance for others reading the thread, and more work for moderators. It's best to restrict what users can do here.
    • Edited by scorpion007 Wednesday, April 9, 2008 11:51 PM added extra comment
    Wednesday, April 9, 2008 11:48 PM