Markdown Migration
Ebalosus 
Build commie blocks!
NGL I’m not the biggest fan of Markdown. What I like about textile is the simplicity in combining syntax changes, like if I want a sentence where it’s all italicised with the emphasised parts bolded, or if I want a few letters of words bolded or italicised to emphasis.
I’m not against the change mind you, and fully understand why it’s being done; I’m just loathe to learn how to do some of the more complex stuff all over again.
I’m not against the change mind you, and fully understand why it’s being done; I’m just loathe to learn how to do some of the more complex stuff all over again.
Princess Celestia
Administrator
Devops
@Ebalosus
I am an italic sentence with some bold parts and then some more italic parts
*I am an italic sentence **with some bold parts** and then some more italic p**a**rt**s*** I am an italic sentence with some bold parts and then some more italic parts
Background Pony #1A00
Thank god for the
git revert Ebalosus
Build commie blocks!
@Princess Celestia
Ah ok, I see now. I thought you’d have to use backslashes like on reddit to go between formatting.
Ah ok, I see now. I thought you’d have to use backslashes like on reddit to go between formatting.
Sollace 
I am the night!
@Princess Celestia
I personally hate that markdown overloads operators like that.
How I normally would write that:
_I am an italic sentence **with some bold parts** and then some more italic p**a**rt**s**_
I personally hate that markdown overloads operators like that.
How I normally would write that:
_I am an italic sentence **with some bold parts** and then some more italic p**a**rt**s**_
Princess Celestia
Administrator
Devops
@Sollace
Same, I actually wrote it exactly like that. The Textile conversion layer converted it to * syntax.
Same, I actually wrote it exactly like that. The Textile conversion layer converted it to * syntax.
Sollace
I am the night!
@Princess Celestia
Ooof Yeah. I had to fiddle with it to get the conversation not to mess with it.
After thinking about it a bit, I think I actually prefer textile over markdown. Textile’s syntax just makes more sense.
Ooof Yeah. I had to fiddle with it to get the conversation not to mess with it.
After thinking about it a bit, I think I actually prefer textile over markdown. Textile’s syntax just makes more sense.
rautamiekka 
What about the noparse tag ? I’ve needed that before and there’s no telling about the future.
Background Pony #C54F
Question: Can we use the external images syntax for on-site images?
Sollace
I am the night!
Found a bug (I think):
Relative links don’t seem to work with markdown whereas they did work before.
See:
vs
![twilightsmile]()
`See:
Relative links don’t seem to work with markdown whereas they did work before.
See:
vs
`See:
vs
`
LightningBolt 
![Thread Starter - [NO SPOILER, LEAK-FREE] Season 8 Discussion and Speculation: Discovery Family airings](https://derpicdn.net/badges/2017/7/2/0bd59d4eff9c3aeaad.svg "Thread Starter - [NO SPOILER, LEAK-FREE] Season 8 Discussion and Speculation: Discovery Family airings")
Senior Moderator
Undead inside
@Background Pony #C54F
Why would you want to, is the real question?
Why would you want to, is the real question?
Background Pony #C54F
@LightningBolt
I was wondering, because i was looking over the syntax, and i noticed this on the on-site images portion:
>You should always use this for on-site uploads! (or risk being banned)
I was wondering, because i was looking over the syntax, and i noticed this on the on-site images portion:
>You should always use this for on-site uploads! (or risk being banned)
LightningBolt
Senior Moderator
Undead inside
@Background Pony #C54F
Because >> always respects filters and links back to the original image. It can also be multiple sizes. There is no reason to use direct links for onsite images unless you wanna purposely get past people’s filters, which is not nice. Direct image links can also break too if the site database changes, >> embeds will never break.
Because >> always respects filters and links back to the original image. It can also be multiple sizes. There is no reason to use direct links for onsite images unless you wanna purposely get past people’s filters, which is not nice. Direct image links can also break too if the site database changes, >> embeds will never break.
Background Pony #C54F
@LightningBolt
And what if we want to use the external images syntax for derpicdn? Does it count as breaking the rules? (i’m curious, if that’s alright.)
And what if we want to use the external images syntax for derpicdn? Does it count as breaking the rules? (i’m curious, if that’s alright.)
LightningBolt
Senior Moderator
Undead inside
@Background Pony #C54F
I guess it depends on the reasoning? I still don’t understand why you’d want to but I guess for the hypothetical, variable?
I guess it depends on the reasoning? I still don’t understand why you’d want to but I guess for the hypothetical, variable?
Princess Celestia
Administrator
Devops
@Sollace
It breaks due to the way Rust implementation of camo client parses URIs.
It breaks due to the way Rust implementation of camo client parses URIs.
let url = Url::parse(&uri).ok()?;
```
This will simply abort the code and return an empty string if the URL cannot be parsed (since we catch this exception further in the code). It requires a valid URL. I could fix it to allow URIs as well, but I haven't really found a decent reason to, since even if you use a URL that begins with http://, it will get turned into https://, and this site is on a strict HSTS policy, so it will never be served over non-https.
That said, I should probably fix this.
Background Pony #0E53
Can you make these tags suggestions from the tag editor work in the site search fields too? It would be very convenient, especially for searching for tags and artist names, the exact spelling of which you don’t know.
Background Pony #C54F
@LightningBolt
Hey, i’m ok with it, i was just curious because previously we had to link images, including on-site images.
If it doesn’t affect me, i’m fine.
Can’t wait to see the new look for the editor. :)
Hey, i’m ok with it, i was just curious because previously we had to link images, including on-site images.
If it doesn’t affect me, i’m fine.
Can’t wait to see the new look for the editor. :)
Princess Celestia
Administrator
Devops
@Background Pony #0E53
It was actually decided against after a discussion. I think the reasoning at the time was like, imagine you’re a 14-year old person on a default filter looking for something innocent, and suddenly get insane amount of porn tags as suggestions.
It was actually decided against after a discussion. I think the reasoning at the time was like, imagine you’re a 14-year old person on a default filter looking for something innocent, and suddenly get insane amount of porn tags as suggestions.
Princess Celestia
Administrator
Devops
@Background Pony #C54F
You can, but you should not.
@rautamiekka
In the future you can either surround content you don’t want parsed in backticks (`stuff you don’t want parsed` =
```
content you don’t want parsed
```
If you want only a certain tag to not be parsed, you can prefix it with a backslash like so
You can, but you should not.
@rautamiekka
In the future you can either surround content you don’t want parsed in backticks (`stuff you don’t want parsed` =
stuff you don't want parsed), or put it into a code block like so:```
content you don’t want parsed
```
If you want only a certain tag to not be parsed, you can prefix it with a backslash like so
\*this won't be italic\* (*this won’t be italic*)Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!