-
That's a good summary of the ToDo list we have from many people, and we are working to address most of it.
A couple of corrections though;
#3 you can use BBCode. Try it. The reasons we're pushing Markdown are that you really don't need to learn something, in fact... just unlearn. Markdown is basically back to WordPro style syntax, or email syntax. And email is why it was selected. Do you know how many people will get a PM notification email and hit reply in their email client? And why shouldn't they? Email is a communication tool and they should be able to. We want the email they receive to look good (Markdown ensures does this, BBCode does not), and we want their plain text reply (which will convert into a PM and append to your messages) to look good (again, Markdown does this easily even on mobile keyboards, BBCode much less so.
But... you can mix and match BBCode, Markdown, HTML. Only a few things are blocked, security risks like EMBED, OBJECT, IFRAME, and things that could break the site like FORMS, and the STYLE attribute.
On #7, it is staying. LFGSS did link rewriting to about 70% of links... a LOT of links were re-written. No-one was up in arms then, but yet they were re-written. This time it's all links, and more indication about the destination, better embedding (Garmin Activity for the modern style added just this morning), and a better chance for the platform to be viable long-term.
This one is interesting:
Whatever machinery translates the link lfgss.com/conversations/131364/newest/ to the URL lfgss.com/conversations/131364/?offset=3650#comment11753000 is dropping the anchor on both Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 6.2; Win64; x64) Presto/2.12.388 Version/12.17 and IE9/WindowPhone 7.8. It's not that my two default browsers are failing to jump to the anchor, it actually isn't there in the address bar.
We don't ever exclude the anchor.
Our code isn't sitting here having a laugh by choosing to do something different for Opera and IE9 on Windows. We send the anchor every time.
The anchor is in the right place too, the RFC states that it must follow the query.
But I wonder... if you exclude the query, does it allow the anchor through? https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/131364/#6012578
You are reading a single comment by @gbj_tester and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Velocio
@gbj_tester
Things which have changed compared with last week which are ruining my experience of LFGSS.
Whatever machinery translates the link https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/131364/newest/ to the URL https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/131364/?offset=3650#comment11753000 is dropping the anchor on both Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 6.2; Win64; x64) Presto/2.12.388 Version/12.17 and IE9/WindowPhone 7.8. It's not that my two default browsers are failing to jump to the anchor, it actually isn't there in the address bar.
When I go to a page called https://www.lfgss.com/updates/, I expect to see stuff which has been updated, not a long list of everything I've already read, i.e. give me back my usercp
Lack of quoting has made most of my subscribed threads into an unintelligible mess of non sequitur gibberish
I'm not about to learn a new language at my age, and presumably neither are millions of other people who have worked out how to use about 3 different BBCode tags.
I paid good money for this 1920px wide screen, it seems a waste to have half of it occupied by grey bars. I'm currently looking at about 2 million pixels and seeing under 30 words of actual content.
Sometimes I forget the exact thread and page on which something was mentioned, so I search for it. Well, I used to. Now there is no proper search form, I suppose I'll have to have perfect recall or never revisit the past.
I used to click on the log-in button on my browser and get straight into LFGSS. Now I have to navigate to some third party site and type in a load of shit. One click has been replaced by three clicks, a bunch of typing, and the probably vain hope that the huge target presented by persona's attempt to capture 7 billion people's passwords won't be the biggest prize for cyber criminals in the world.
Link rewriting is evil. I know why it's done (and the reasons people give for doing it, which are not the same), but even the proposed good points are worse than the problem they claim to solve in terms of security and privacy.