Test thread for quoting.

POSTED BY: HAKEN
UPDATED: Monday, January 17, 2011 18:36
VIEWED: 8315
PAGE 1 of 1

HAKEN

Monday, January 17, 2011 8:15 AM

This is a test.

Quote:
This is a test.

This is a test.

Quote:
This is a test.

This is a test.

Quote:
This is a test.

THESOMNAMBULIST

Monday, January 17, 2011 9:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by HAKEN:
This is a test.
Quote:
This is a test.

Quote:
This is a test.

This is a test.
Quote:
This is a test.

This is a test.
Quote:
This is a test.

Quote:
This is a test.

If that was a test then this is the answer

Cartoons - http://cirqusartsandmusic.blogspot.com

HAKEN

Monday, January 17, 2011 11:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
Quote:
Originally posted by HAKEN:
This is a test.
Quote:
This is a test.

Quote:
This is a test.

This is a test.
Quote:
This is a test.

This is a test.
Quote:
This is a test.

Quote:
This is a test.

If that was a test then this is the answer

Okay, I think the quoting is working okay now on the 2.0 side.

TWO

Monday, January 17, 2011 2:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HAKEN:
Okay, I think the quoting is working okay now on the 2.0 side.

Over at the beta site, http://beta.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=27&tid=47207 the top most quote is not in bold (or BOLD) where it says “Originally posted by TheSomnambulist.” Is not being bold a mistake? Or just a difference in taste? The lower level quotes, which are light blue and indented, are in bold.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

HAKEN

Monday, January 17, 2011 4:58 PM

Boldness of quote is control by the bold tag.

HAKEN

Monday, January 17, 2011 4:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HAKEN:
Boldness of quote is control by the bold tag.

When I reply with quote, it bolds the quote.

HAKEN

Monday, January 17, 2011 5:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HAKEN:
Quote:
Originally posted by HAKEN:
Boldness of quote is control by the bold tag.

When I reply with quote, it bolds the quote.

If I reply with quote to a previously quoted text, the bold tag will bold all text underneath it. This would explain why the very top isn't in bold, but everything else is. I suppose the solution is to initially bold everything instead of just quoted text. Or we can just get rid of the bolding altogether since it really doesn't make that much of a difference. What do you think?

TWO

Monday, January 17, 2011 5:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HAKEN:
Quote:
Originally posted by HAKEN:
Quote:
Originally posted by HAKEN:
Boldness of quote is control by the bold tag.

When I reply with quote, it bolds the quote.

If I reply with quote to a previously quoted text, the bold tag will bold all text underneath it. This would explain why the very top isn't in bold, but everything else is. I suppose the solution is to initially bold everything instead of just quoted text. Or we can just get rid of the bolding altogether since it really doesn't make that much of a difference. What do you think?

I'm thinking that clicking "reply with quote" should automatically put the bold marker behind the /quote. I manually stuck the bold marker in front of this comment by going back and editing it.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

PHOENIXROSE

Monday, January 17, 2011 5:52 PM

Alright, nested quoting!
I think if it's going to be bright blue it's easy enough to read without the bolding. The gray was a bit easier to read when bold, but it might not be necessary on 2.0

I do not need the written code of a spiritual belief to act like a decent human being.

TWO

Monday, January 17, 2011 6:01 PM

We'll do a side-by-side test of automatically bold versus not bold. I'm prejudiced in favor of bold even before running the comparison, so my opinion can't be trusted:

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose: Alright, nested quoting!
I think if it's going to be bright blue it's easy enough to read without the bolding. The gray was a bit easier to read when bold, but it might not be necessary on 2.0

But looking at the results over at the beta site, I think bold clearly wins. If you're on the old site, go to http://beta.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=47207#827099 to make the comparison. There's more difference between original and beta than just color.

PHOENIXROSE

Monday, January 17, 2011 6:25 PM

I find the non-bold easier to read in that blue. It's bright enough that the bold type starts to 'bleed' a little bit to my eyes; the shapes blend into each other just a bit and it's harder to read comfortably. That tends to happen to me when the medium is projecting light; I occasionally have the same problem with very bold white text on black. The gray was more subdued, and easy to read in all strengths and sizes, but the blue is bright, so I vote non-bold.

I do not need the written code of a spiritual belief to act like a decent human being.

TWO

Monday, January 17, 2011 6:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
I find the non-bold easier to read in that blue. It's bright enough that the bold type starts to 'bleed' a little bit to my eyes; the shapes blend into each other just a bit and it's harder to read comfortably. That tends to happen to me when the medium it projecting light; I occasionally have the same problem with very bold white text on black. The gray was more subdued, and easy to read in all strengths and sizes, but the blue is bright, so I vote non-bold.

I do not need the written code of a spiritual belief to act like a decent human being.

Maybe the comments should not be in bright blue? The comments are already indented. Do they also need to be in a sharply contrasting color? I think not, but I'm prejudiced. If you're at the original site, go to the beta site to see. http://beta.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=27&tid=47207#827103

So, quotations could be white letters (not gray, not blue) and not bold. Since quotations are already indented and separated with horizontal bars, the bright colors and bold letters are over-kill