CFC Signature Troubles

[Blue Monkey]

Seriously annoying me and not an April Fool's joke:

My signature looks like this on my screen:


But everyone on a Windows box says it looks OK; it looks OK when I check the forum from my brother's winbox. I don't seem to be able to fix it by any of my attempts at editing or reaaranging, deleted then re-establishing the links, etc. I'm running OsX 10.3.9 on a G3, the browser is Firefox 2.0.0.13.

 

[MAS]

I'm running OSX 10.5.2, I checked with both FF 2.0.0.13 (Intell version) and Safari 3.1 In both cases, your sig looks perfectly OK to me!

 

[AlanH]

I'm not entirely surprised that you are having problems. Have you had a look at the BBCode in your signature?

Just as one small example, I counted a nest of 6 tag pairs, all wrapped around a sequence, with a single bullet character in the middle. I got confused looking through it, so I'm not surprised FF finds it a challenge.

PS If you want me to edit it for you to reduce the clutter, please let me know. I just delved deeper, and found a specific error where there is at least one unmatched set of tags. [Correction: It looks like the tags all balance - there are just way too many of them, many contracting earlier ones to no useful effect]

Having looked through the code, the problem you have with link underlines being too low is that you set the font size several times, with different values. The link is then drawn assuming one font size and corresponding page position, and then the text is drawn using a different font size. There are over 120 tag pairs in the whole sig.

 

[MAS]

Its the acid7 test in disguise!

 

[Blue Monkey]

@AlanH: If you could sort in a only few minutes work it I'd really appreciate it. I tried several times erasing & rewriting that section. I guess it got tangled worse & worse since I never erased the complete signature & started from scratch.

On the gripping hand, maybe I should just do it myself, since I created the problem & apparently I'm the only one suffering the effects. Let me try the "total erase & redo" & see what happens. If worse comes to worst, I can always ask you to tackle it. Thanks for at least clearing my head.

 

[AlanH]

I have a copy here in BBEdit, so I can prune it if you need me to fix it after you've had a go. Just shout.

 

[Blue Monkey]

I got it sorted out.

Previously, I was only looking at the WYSIWYG version of the CFC sig editor (BB code confuses me sometimes - I think I downloaded BBEdit, but don't know how to use it). As I tried to change fonts, formats, & colors things just got more and more tangled.

Switching editor modes, then taking out all the code, I was able to redo it starting with just the plain text. I only changed one piece at a time in one way, previewing at each step, until I gained confidence. Now I know how to proceed next time.

Thanks again for sorting out my thinking process.

 

[AlanH]

That's much better

BBEdit is just a text editor. TextEdit would work as well. BBEdit comes into its own if you are doing more complex things with languages like HTML, PHP, etc. ... or if you need to do global search / replace operations on lengthy text.

 

[Blue Monkey]

That's much better

BBEdit is just a text editor. TextEdit would work as well. BBEdit comes into its own if you are doing more complex things with languages like HTML, PHP, etc. ... or if you need to do global search / replace operations on lengthy text.

And for me what's confusing is keeping track of the nested
- which is weird because I can track the ( ( ( ) ) ) of LISP & similar languages almost subliminally.

 

[AlanH]

BBCode is awkward for tracking tags. To check yours I broke it up into separate lines, with a line break and an indent for each tag. That let me see the nest structure, but it was just for diagnosis. BBCode is not supported in BBEdit, which can help with HTML tag balancing and validation. And, of course, if you break it into separate lines you can't leave the line breaks in, as they all get displayed. I don't think BBCode is intended to be used for anything really complex.