<OL
  • You cant save a post you are working on as a draft on perlmonks.org. When working on something lengthy, you don't want to lose it after 5 minutes of editing.
  • You could conceivably use an HTML editor and save as you wanted and then upload then you are done
  • The problem with (2) is that perlmonks.org does not follow HTML rules because of its redef of CODE.

    Any suggestions?

    • Replies are listed 'Best First'.
    Re: The Posting Conundrum
    by mirod (Canon) on Mar 05, 2001 at 23:51 UTC

      2 solutions:

      • use any regular text editor, vi, emacs, notepad, your choice... after all that's the way HTML used to be edited, and it's not like you really need the wysiwyg stuff,
      • start editing your post in a window, then open an other one and keep doing what you wanted, then come back to editing your post later.

      Frankly I don't see a problem here.

    		[reply]

        No, no! How can I verify how nice my tables, fonts, and colors look without a WYSIWYG HTML editor??

        But seriously, the amount of HTML in a good PerlMonks posting is quite small so I concur with the recommendation of using a generic text editor.

        Then you can cut'n'paste then Preview to see if you made any formatting typos.

                - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
    		[reply]
    (Ovid) Re: The Posting Conundrum
    by Ovid (Cardinal) on Mar 06, 2001 at 14:26 UTC
      I know where you're coming from and I have certainly thought having the ability to save a draft would be nice, but not that significant. I suspect that you would find this feature more useful than some others because your posts tend to be longer and more detailed, hence making the ability to save a draft more valuable.

      However, I'm not sure that the benefit is great enough. I use <BR>, <P>, <blockquote>, <EM>, and lists. That really is all that I need. However, if you think about it, this really isn't HTML. vroom has created a markup language that is similar to HTML (and generally uses the browser's ability to parse it). There are so many non-standard elements that I think it's a different markup language and helpful to think of it that way:

      • <READMORE>
      • <CODE> (which unfortunately is the same name as an HTML tag)
      • [cpan://CGI|use it or else]
      • [Ovid|some guy's home node]
      If I look at it in that light, I might think "the similarity to HTML makes it easier to learn." If I think of it as HTML, I might get irritated that it's non-standard. It's a matter of looking at the glass as half-full or half-empty (or twice as large as it needs to be).

      I recall that abigail had similar complaints.

      Cheers,
      Ovid

      Join the Perlmonks Setiathome Group or just click on the the link and check out our stats.

    		[reply]
    Re: The Posting Conundrum
    by Corion (Patriarch) on Mar 05, 2001 at 23:55 UTC

      I've seen others complain about the instability of Netscape, but I've never had much problems with my browser except that the HTML textfield input does not have a search/replace facility. I regularly paste the text over to notepad.exe or proton for my larger posts.

      On the other side, I feel that there should never be any problem with Perlmonks not honoring the CODE tags, as there is absolutely no need to use a HTML editor that inserts tags without your knowledge. Simply markup all code with <CODE> tags, and put each paragraph in <p> tags and you're all set. Any further adornement of your node will detract from the content of your node, and this is not www.designermonks.org but www.perlmonks.org.

    		[reply]
        Hee hee. There's no designermonks now, but maybe there should be. A place where monks can discuss all things design, like whether or not flared robes are really 'it' this season, and whether the camel code goes better with plaid or paisley.

        Hmmmm.

        Oh dear...

        ____________________
        Jeremy
        I didn't believe in tragedy until I wore it.

    		[reply]

    Back to Perl Monks Discussion