http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=294738


in reply to Re: div tag in signatures
in thread div tag in signatures

Ok Petruchio. Now that its explained I am fully supportive of this idea. I have posted an updated patch addnewnoteform - (patch) for pmdev that extends it a touch to address the concerns raised by tye and myself and others, as well as adrianhs idea of two tags, one general and one user specific.

In my patch if the special div tags are included by the user in their sig then no modification is done at all. It doesnt add the tag to users without an automatic node signature/template, and it adds a brief explanatory comment telling the suprised user who has overlooked these threads what to do about it all :-). For instance I would see something like: 

<!--
Signature Autowrap. Add the div tags verbatim yourself via User Settin
+gs and
they won't be added automatically, and this message will go away.
-->
<div class="pmsig"><div class="pmsig_108447">
<!-- demerphq's signature/node template -->
</div></div>

[download]

Perhaps I should have explained in more detail in the comment, or even better when it is applied it should refer directly to a node/thread on the subject.

I will see what I can do to make it more consistantly provided, but this at least will avoid annoyance and surprise with regard to the new feature. (Which I dont think should be removed just because it isn't consistantly applied, its arguable that signatures should not be removable from top level posts and even if that argument is lost this is still a good first step I think.)

Cheers,

UPDATE:
I've added a patch to addnewform in order to make it consistant with my other patch. I believe if both are applied we should have the .sig divs added consistantly and a user friendly way. Obviously this code represents duplication and in fact both pieces should be refactored out into a single routine, but I cant post a patch to do so. I hope this contribution absolves me from whatever irritation those involved feel towards me and my reaction. Cheers again.


---
demerphq

    First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
    -- Gandhi

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: div tag in signatures
by belg4mit (Prior) on Sep 29, 2003 at 04:24 UTC
    You're assuming the "surprised use" actually cares to look at the source. Meanwhile you're wasting those bytes umpteen times a day...

    In any event, it seems a perhaps more useful case to include in the code is for people like Abigail-II... no div if no sig.

    --
    I'm not belgian but I play one on TV.

[reply]

      You're assuming the "surprised use" actually cares to look at the source.

      No im not. The comment would show up in the text box the user would edit their text in.

      no div if no sig.

      Please reread the node you replied to more carefully. Sepcifically the line that says

        It doesnt add the tag to users without an automatic node signature/template,

      As i told perrin, and mentioned there, the patches I posted don't add the tags to people without an automatic signature template.


      ---
      demerphq

        First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
        -- Gandhi

[reply]
[d/l]
        What about Anonymous Monk? He has a nice 
        <div class="pmsig_961">

</div>

        [download]
        waiting for him.
[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion