How to get a pix suitable for the forum?

rjent · Post by **rjent** » Thu Apr 03, 2014 1:10 am

JPG40504 wrote:I quoted the wrong post!:o

I wasn't going to comment on how dumb you sounded ....

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Thu Apr 03, 2014 1:15 am

rjent wrote:I wasn't going to comment on how dumb you sounded ....

Thank You! I am quite capable of screwing things up all by myself!:rolleyes:

rpd · Post by **rpd** » Thu Apr 03, 2014 2:17 am

charlese wrote:I'm too uneducated to post what looks like a copied page, but here's a link that should give you the window I see. I'm missing the entire top line of icons you have.

http://www.shopsmith.net/forums/newreply.htm?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=164782

The link you posted shows the "missing icons" for me.

It is possible that the problem is not in Windows but in your Forum settings.

To check if this is so,

click on User CP (top menu bar, left side)
click on Edit Options
scroll down to the last entry Message Editor Interface
if it set to Basic Editor the icons won't show,
change it to Standard Editor or Enhanced Interface.
click Save Changes at the bottom.

Another possibility is if you are using Quick Reply which uses the Basic Editor.

terrydowning · Post by **terrydowning** » Thu Apr 03, 2014 11:55 am

Which buttons show or don't show and their functionality is a function of your browser and how the page is coded to display. Blame the software developers of the framework of this page for not fully testing their web based software on all available platforms. I do this kind of thing for a living and coding for all of the different browsers and how they render pages is really a hassle.

Chrome
[ATTACH]24623[/ATTACH]

Firefox 27.0.1
[ATTACH]24624[/ATTACH]

I.E 8 (Don't ask it's a work thing I would prefer to have the latest)
[ATTACH]24625[/ATTACH]

In chrome I scroll down to the Manage Attachments Button under additional Options as the Paper clip never shows.
[ATTACH]24626[/ATTACH]

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Thu Apr 03, 2014 12:06 pm

If 'software developers' would stop 'doing their own thing' and adhere to 'standards'(albeit expandable) such shenanigans would be less prevalent. By expandable, I mean including backward compatibility.

This being an older version of the forum software, there was no Chrome to test against.

BTW There is no way to 'test' against all browsers without IE8.

'Assumptions' really bite with software programming.

terrydowning · Post by **terrydowning** » Thu Apr 03, 2014 1:12 pm

JPG40504 wrote:If 'software developers' would stop 'doing their own thing' and adhere to 'standards'(albeit expandable) such shenanigans would be less prevalent. By expandable, I mean including backward compatibility.

Ahh the "Standards" debate. The problem with the W3C and their so-called "standards" (which are actually very loose guidelines) is that they are open to interpretation and the difference in how these "standards" are interpreted and implemented borders on the religious. To my knowledge all of the major browser offerings ever produced comply with the W3C standards or they would not work. That the WWW and the variety of web browsers works at all still amazes me. All of the major browsers have backward compatibility built in. Some of the backward compatibility is intentionally removed or disabled to pug security holes and flaws that less than ethical people use to exploit your computer.

The reality is in most cases when page elements do not render correctly it is NOT the O.S. or the browser, it is the site developer that is the cause of the issue; They either lack knowledge or don't have the resources to correct the problem. Or the issue is corrected in a later release of the software. If a site owner does not update well who do you blame then?

There are some sites that actually render pretty much identically regardless of browser. This is a testament to the skill and tenacity of the developer/team responsible for the site/software. Multi-browser testing is very tedious, I know this personally, I do this for a living.

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Thu Apr 03, 2014 1:24 pm

"which are actually very loose guidelines"

Therein lies a fallacy!:D

BTW W3C????

terrydowning · Post by **terrydowning** » Thu Apr 03, 2014 1:36 pm

Back to the topic

Here is the editor in IE 10 on Windows Server 2012 (Same UI Engine as Windows 8) I don't have my Windows 8 machine up and running yet.

[ATTACH]24628[/ATTACH]

None of the buttons work. (Probably a script or rendering issue, it could be related to security settings in the browser as well. This browser is set to a very high security setting as it is on a server)

To adjust security settings for the Browser.
click the gear button
[ATTACH]24630[/ATTACH]
Click Internet Options
[ATTACH]24631[/ATTACH]
This will open the Internet Options dialog. Click on the security tab to adjust security settings.

My guess is to start by unchecking "Enable Protected Mode" if that is checked.

[ATTACH]24632[/ATTACH]

In the meantime.
To upload pictures scroll down to the Additional Options section and click the Manage Attachments link (It renders as a button on Chrome)
[ATTACH]24629[/ATTACH]

terrydowning · Post by **terrydowning** » Thu Apr 03, 2014 1:49 pm

JPG40504 wrote:"which are actually very loose guidelines"

Therein lies a fallacy!:D

BTW W3C????

W3C = World Wide Web consortium the standards body that controls the different specifications and guidelines for how the world wide web is served and rendered in browsers.

Wikipedia entry here

WWW is world wide and that is part of the problem with creating the standards. Lots of interested parties with varying degrees of resources, commitment and competing agendas. No one really owns the WWW and any body is free to do pretty much whatever they want. All they need is enough traction to make something work. It really is the epitome of an unregulated environment.

JPG · Post by **JPG** » Thu Apr 03, 2014 2:24 pm

terrydowning wrote:W3C = World Wide Web consortium the standards body that controls the different specifications and guidelines for how the world wide web is served and rendered in browsers.

Wikipedia entry here

WWW is world wide and that is part of the problem with creating the standards. Lots of interested parties with varying degrees of resources, commitment and competing agendas. No one really owns the WWW and any body is free to do pretty much whatever they want. All they need is enough traction to make something work. It really is the epitome of an unregulated environment.

383 members! No way there is 'common' ground!:D