Daniel73 wrote:More changes on McDuck International, 24 October 2006:
[...]
Other creators
Santiago Ceballos, William Van Horn, Paul Murry, Don Rosa, etc.
Why am I not mentioned? Am I just part of the "cetera"?
--An other creator
Daniel73 wrote:And, as a test, I've added a picture on top of the forum-page:
Daniel73 wrote:I get a safety warning from on this forum-page now, and the pictures don't open.
You and your Google! How can I keep the forum tidy this way? :O
Daniel73 wrote:Here's the tag I've used:
<IMG SRC="http://img.mcduck.nl/personage/meerdere/cbpg-1977.png" WIDTH="500" HEIGHT="170" ALIGN="RIGHT"><BR>About Disney comics. Moderated by <A HREF="http://discussion.mcduck.nl/profile.php?id=20">Daniel73</A>.
<img src="http://img.mcduck.nl/personage/meerdere/cbpg-1977.png" height="90" style="float: right"/><br />About Disney comics. Moderated by <a href="http://discussion.mcduck.nl/profile.php?id=20">Daniel73</a>.
Sander wrote:You can remove the images from my previous post if they are causing warning messages.
Sander wrote:You don't need to set width and height for images in HTML. So you can remove width and set height to another value. Try this:
- Code: Select all
<img src="http://img.mcduck.nl/personage/meerdere/cbpg-1977.png" height="90" style="float: right"/><br />About Disney comics. Moderated by <a href="http://discussion.mcduck.nl/profile.php?id=20">Daniel73</a>.
I'm not sure whether 90 pixels is small enough, you can try entering different sizes there.
Daniel73 wrote:Sander wrote:You can remove the images from my previous post if they are causing warning messages.
I would if I could. I don't understand the tags you've put there. Can you edit them to URLs yourself?
[url=http://example.com/image.png][img]http://example.com/image-thumbnail.png[/img][/url]
Daniel73 wrote:As far as I know the size is important in HTML. It helps the browser to leave room open for the loading picture, in the layout of the page.
Daniel73 wrote:Using a value other than the image's real size, tends to make a picture look crumbed.
Daniel73 wrote:If you prefer a smaller picture then it should be edited, I guess. And wouldn't this particular picture loose too much detail?
Do you find the current size too big, or is it just a technical advice?
Daniel73 wrote:Preferably the rules should be compitable with the Dutch section.
Daniel73 wrote:{No discrimination.}
Literal translation: No racisme or other forms of discrimination.
Racism (racisme) is a form of discrimination.
Daniel73 wrote:{No (links to) sexual explicit contents or rude pictures/texts.}
Debatable: What are rude pictures/texts? I guess pictures of corpses, injuries, etc.
Daniel73 wrote:Literal translation refers to porn instead of sexual explicit contents. I think "sexual explicit contents" is a better definition.
Daniel73 wrote:{No warez or other illegal matters.}
Daniel73 wrote:{Hotlinking, linking to pictures of other sites without permission of the owner, is forbidden and these pictures can be removed.}
I'd see this as a warning, emphazing the rights of owners and their servers. For a moderator it's often difficult to judge if permission has been given or not. I'd say the rule means that complaints will be taken seriously and (of course) in benefit of the owners and their servers.
Owners themselves can avoid abuse by replacing their pictures for something else. So, practically speaking, it's also important to be aware that hotlinking means using someone else's service. Pictures can be changed or removed. An advantage of asking permission first, is that the owner might be willing to keep the picture online for you.
Daniel73 wrote:{Publication of (your own or someone else's) private address information and private phone numbers is forbidden. Exceptions are your own email adress and location, but there's of course no obligation to make them known.}
I'd rather write the last sentence as: Exceptions are your own email adress and location, but it's (of course) fully your own free decision to make them public.
Daniel73 wrote:And I want to add that for a moderator it's terribly difficult, if not just impossible, to undo that decision for you. Internet is like Pandora's box. Therefore I'd recommend anonymity as default on McDuck. Practically speaking: Don't make your identity known because someone uses a real name, or expects you to tell more about yourself.
Daniel73 wrote:{Misuse of someone else's name/identity is forbidden.}
This includes the names of guests.
Daniel73 wrote:{If you want to comment to someone, use his/her given nickname (alias/user name).}
Other Creator wrote:Daniel73 wrote:More changes on McDuck International, 24 October 2006:
[...]
Other creators
Santiago Ceballos, William Van Horn, Paul Murry, Don Rosa, etc.
Why am I not mentioned? Am I just part of the "cetera"?
--An other creator
Sander wrote:Daniel73 wrote:And, as a test, I've added a picture on top of the forum-page:
Nice idea! It could have been mine.
I don't know what it looks like in Internet Explorer, but in Mozilla Firefox the layout is a bit distorted: [...]
You could try setting the image height, by adding something like height="90" to the <img> tag.
Sander wrote:Apparently even Google doesn't like hotlinking anymore...
Another attempt: click here for screenshots.
Sander wrote:Daniel73 wrote:Sander wrote:You can remove the images from my previous post if they are causing warning messages.
I would if I could. I don't understand the tags you've put there. Can you edit them to URLs yourself?
Yes, and I've done that now. But I'll explain what code I used, so that you can change it as moderator. I used something like:
- Code: Select all
[url=http://example.com/image.png][url]http://example.com/image-thumbnail.png[/url][/url]
It displays a 'thumbnail-sized' version of the image in a hyperlink referring to the full-size version. I removed both images now to avoid dead links.
Sander wrote:Daniel73 wrote:As far as I know the size is important in HTML. It helps the browser to leave room open for the loading picture, in the layout of the page.
I don't consider setting the image size very important, as most people have fast internet access now. Leaving room open for the picture can be a disadvantage if the picture can't be displayed -- for example because the server is down, the user has pictures disabled, or an offline version of the page is loaded and the user hasn't got internet access. Then a lot of the user's screen space is wasted.
Sander wrote:Daniel73 wrote:Using a value other than the image's real size, tends to make a picture look crumbed.
It's a better temporary solution than distorting the forum layout, I think. Besides, this picture looks a bit crumbed anyway, as it was made for use on a light background. You can see light-coloured pixels in front of the dark blue bar.
Sander wrote:Daniel73 wrote:If you prefer a smaller picture then it should be edited, I guess. And wouldn't this particular picture loose too much detail?
Do you find the current size too big, or is it just a technical advice?
It's just technical advice. You're experimenting with placing a picture at the top of the page, so I'd suggest that you also experiment with resizing the picture. You could also try not using align="right", so that the forum layout isn't distorted (but the header would probably be too big). Nothing can go wrong if you edit a little HTML.
Sander wrote:Maybe this picture is too big indeed, but as you say it's probably not a good choice for this forum anyway.
Sander wrote:Also, please don't count on me for resizing pictures for use on this forum. Editing images can be a lot of work and I'm not really fond of it...
Sander wrote:Reply to #3:Daniel73 wrote:Preferably the rules should be compitable with the Dutch section.
The main priority should be defining good rules. We can look at the other forums afterwards.
Sander wrote:I'll continue this reply another time. It is really taking a lot of time from me, while I should be doing (a lot of) homework and programming stuff, like the forum backup thing...
Board description
A short description of this bulletin board (shown at the top of every page). This field may contain HTML.
Daniel73 wrote:Or is adding a picture a way of "hacking" the intentions of PunBB?
Daniel73 wrote:How can I properly put a picture on the right in exactly the way of the forumfox-picture on your "secret" PunBB-schoolforum?
<img src="img/vos6.gif" alt="[vos]" style="float:right;margin:-16px -2px 0 8px;_margin-top:0" />
Daniel73 wrote:Can you give a working example?
Daniel73 wrote:If a picture is too big, I give an URL.
Daniel73 wrote:I don't understand your code as it is displayed. Apparently, PunBB has changed some img-tags to url-tags. PunBB does that when quoting.
Daniel73 wrote:Sander wrote:I don't consider setting the image size very important, as most people have fast internet access now. Leaving room open for the picture can be a disadvantage if the picture can't be displayed -- for example because the server is down, the user has pictures disabled, or an offline version of the page is loaded and the user hasn't got internet access. Then a lot of the user's screen space is wasted.
When the image size isn't defined, you get jumping texts on HTML-pages. The browser has to re-define the screen space.
I disagree that "most people have fast internet access". Servers maybe slow or down.
Daniel73 wrote:I'm curious if it's Mozilla Firefox or PunBB that is to blame here.
Welcome! Please read the <a href="http://discussion.mcduck.nl/viewtopic.php?id=2">welcome message</a> if you are new here.
Return to About McDrake International
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests