| Author |
 Topic  |
|
DavidRhodes
Senior Member
United Kingdom
1222 Posts |
 Posted - 30 March 2004 : 15:57:04
|
They seem to be case-sensitive
[img] works
[IMG] doesn't
i've only noticed it on signatures, maybe the same for all images |
The UK MkIVs Forum |
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20584 Posts |
Posted - 30 March 2004 : 16:35:15
|
| it shouldn't the forum code does a UCase convert before the check, so shouldn't matter |
 |
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20584 Posts |
Posted - 30 March 2004 : 17:09:03
|
| You are correct, I will take a look to see why. |
|
|
|
Gremlin
General Help Moderator
New Zealand
7528 Posts |
Posted - 30 March 2004 : 19:15:25
|
| Earlier versions it was the other way round which was why the Ucase got put in there to begin with wasn't it Huw? |
Kiwihosting.Net - The Forum Hosting Specialists
|
|
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20584 Posts |
Posted - 30 March 2004 : 20:48:28
|
| yes, but oddly enough, they both work on my forum ? |
|
|
|
OneWayMule
Dev. Team Member & Support Moderator
Austria
4969 Posts |
|
|
DavidRhodes
Senior Member
United Kingdom
1222 Posts |
Posted - 31 March 2004 : 04:11:49
|
| I found this is on 3.4.04, not 3.4.03 |
The UK MkIVs Forum |
|
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20584 Posts |
Posted - 31 March 2004 : 04:35:28
|
| yes, but the img tag replacement code is the same, the code that uses the UCase is actually not for img tags, it is for the url tags that have embedded img tags in them, the replaceimagetag code is identical in both versions |
|
|
|
DavidRhodes
Senior Member
United Kingdom
1222 Posts |
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20584 Posts |
Posted - 31 March 2004 : 09:15:51
|
| I'm not disputing that it is a problem, just unsure why, since the replaceimagetag code is the same in both |
|
|
|
Davio
Development Team Member
Jamaica
12217 Posts |
Posted - 31 March 2004 : 12:27:13
|
Both tags work for me. Both on my modified 3.4.03 forum and the unmodified 3.4.04 forum.
I checked it with dynamic signatures on and off.
Huwr, you tested it on a 3.4.04 version and it didn't work? Maybe I am missing a different setting? |
Support Snitz Forums
|
|
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20584 Posts |
Posted - 31 March 2004 : 12:47:52
|
I tested it here and it doesn't work look
 |
|
|
|
Davio
Development Team Member
Jamaica
12217 Posts |
Posted - 31 March 2004 : 12:54:30
|
I'll test it again. But I downloaded the 3.4.04 version and set it up and test it and I'm not reproducing this bug.
It also seems that the IMG tag doesn't work in messages too, on here that is. |
Support Snitz Forums
|
|
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20584 Posts |
Posted - 31 March 2004 : 13:21:10
|
I would try mine, but have spent all afternoon inserting the oracle changes to test that  so my 3.4.04 doesn't work at the moment. |
|
|
|
Davio
Development Team Member
Jamaica
12217 Posts |
Posted - 31 March 2004 : 14:50:36
|
Ok I seem to have found the problem.
In the ReplaceImageTag() function in inc_func_common.asp (around line 1208), add the code highlighted in red:if (oTagPos > 0) and (cTagPos > oTagPos) then
strArray = Split(strTempString, oTag, -1, 1)
for counter2 = 0 to Ubound(strArray)
if (Instr(1, strArray(counter2), cTag, 1) > 0) then
strArray2 = split(strArray(counter2), cTag, -1, 1)
strUrlText = trim(strArray2(0)) This will allow the Split function to do a textual comparison when searching for the opening and closing tag in the string. By default it was doing a binary comparison, which treated the [img] and [IMG] tags as the same. So it errored out during the function and just returned the string unformated. |
Support Snitz Forums
|
|
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20584 Posts |
Posted - 31 March 2004 : 16:09:23
|
well spotted Davio.
Still confused as to why it works on my site, since the code is the same, very odd. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
