BNETDocs Redux

[Don Cullen]

The CSS Theme Editor has been fixed. You guys shouldn't have any more further problems using the editor. If there is any problems, please do feel free to let me know.

[rabbit]

It still doesn't render my changes.

[Don Cullen]

It still doesn't render my changes.

What?? I thought I fixed it... It rendered for me. >.<

Alright, can you post your CSS code, and the changes you made to it so I can attempt to duplicate and pinpoint the problem?

Edit: I went into phpMyAdmin, copied your CSS code, pasted it into my CSS theme editor, and clicked render. It rendered just fine (I originally was using the Experimental theme, so when it rendered your CSS theme, the changes were obvious). I then added the following code:

Code Select Expand

#links,#packets {
     display: none;
}

And clicked Render. It rendered that code as well. So far, I'm not seeing any problems.

Edit2: I've made all kinds of changes to the CSS code, even major changes, modified font sizes, font types, colors, hidden/shown varying div's, hid the logo and the alternate logo, made the alternate text logo only show, and so forth. I even went as so far as to completely wipe the CSS code so the textarea was empty, and clicked render. All changes rendered fine...

As I've said, could you post the CSS code you were trying to use, so I can test it for myself?

Edit3: Camel, I've fixed the mailer misformatting problem. It should come in crystal clear now. Thanks for pointing out the problem!

[Barabajagal]

None of you retards do, I wager. Stop trying to act cool. Do you know why people don't make websites that are friendly to CLI browsers like lynx and links? Because nobody uses them on a day-to-day basis. You don't make webpages for a minority. You make them for a majority. Don't think of the small fraction of a fraction of 1% of your visitors.

Stop crying me a fucking river like you're so fucking inconvenienced by a webpage not being "lynx-friendly" because you sound like a retard.

You obviously have no clue how to design web sites to standard. There are three major points when designing a web site that should always be followed (and sadly, never are): Make it work on any screen size, make it work on any browser, and make it work with any or no extra features enabled. Requiring Javascript is the same as requiring images. All images must have alternate text to be w3c validated for a REASON.

Why do you hate GUIs? What's so terrible about them? Are you just trying to go against the flow of what society wants? Do you have some logical reasoning for using a terminal/command-line versus a GUI (i.e. it saves memory, it's faster to respond, etc. something along those lines)? Or is it just a personal preference? If so, what do you use for AIM/MSN/etc?

Since before my memory begins, I was using computers. My grandmother started me on a Commodore 128 PC. At the age of 7, I learned to program in BASIC 7.2 (which was the language the C128 used as it's operating system). At 9, I learned MONITOR (which was the C128's assembley). It was all text based, 16 colors, 40 columns, 1 MHz processor. It worked fine. Since then, GUIs and Object Oriented systems have annoyed the fuck out of me, due to their excessive nature and coding annoyances. Forums and chat rooms and such are mostly text-based if you think about it, since they have minimal borders of graphics, and buttons, and that's it besides text.

As for what I use for chat, I use Trillian, with a skin I created myself (from scratch), called In The Dark [Screen Shot].

Would it be practical? Since Windows is almost completely GUI dependant, that's going to be a bit hard , but please go on. I'm a bit interested in how you would do the taskbar ...  I don't know about you, but cd and dir are good enough to be my text based explorer.

Brew, the basic idea would be somewhat like DOS for navigation, except it would list the current directory at the top of the window, and you'd be able to click on a folder of the path and navigate there. Or when you do Dir, you could click on a folder or file name instead of typing in "cd folder" or "file.ext". It's not a replacement for windows at all. Explorer is just the desktop, taskbar, and folder viewer. And as for how the taskbar would look, I'm thinking something along the lines of using the old Windows 3.1 style, where the "desktop icons" are running programs, except they're all 16x16 icons with side text down at the bottom. I don't yet have an effective and useful idea for the start menu.

I don't want a full text-based system, as Icons are a helpful way to easily determine what type of file a file is, so any file or folder names will have an icon next to them (unless you disable that feature).

[Don Cullen]

Since before my memory begins, I was using computers. My grandmother started me on a Commodore 128 PC. At the age of 7, I learned to program in BASIC 7.2 (which was the language the C128 used as it's operating system). At 9, I learned MONITOR (which was the C128's assembley). It was all text based, 16 colors, 40 columns, 1 MHz processor. It worked fine. Since then, GUIs and Object Oriented systems have annoyed the fuck out of me, due to their excessive nature and coding annoyances. Forums and chat rooms and such are mostly text-based if you think about it, since they have minimal borders of graphics, and buttons, and that's it besides text.

That's precisely why I gave you this quote:

Like a man who has worn eyeglasses so long that he forgets he has them on, we forget that the world looks to us the way it does because we have become used to seeing it that way through a particular set of lenses. (Kenich Ohmae)

As for what I use for chat, I use Trillian, with a skin I created myself (from scratch), called In The Dark [Screen Shot].

Nice skin, very minimalist. Mind if I use the skin? I have Trillian myself. You also might want to black out the screen names in the screenshot. I doubt Hdx wants everybody on the internet to have his AIM screen name.

Edit: Never mind, I found your skin at your website (http://realityripple.com/software/other/). Thanks.

[Barabajagal]

Oh, I totally didn't realize those showed there. Thanks for pointing that out.

Also,  I'm used to a GUI system now, but that doesn't mean I like it. It still seems excessive, capitalistic, and pointless. I don't associate with that quote as well as I do some others (see my sig )

[Don Cullen]

Oh, I totally didn't realize those showed there. Thanks for pointing that out.

No problem. You still haven't blacked 'em out.

Edit: never mind. It was my browser cache. I clicked refresh, you DID blur 'em out.

[LordVader]

@Don and anyone else interested in the D2GS data, I have started a thread here to discuss changes that I will be looking @ making.

[iCe]

still no W3GS

[Don Cullen]

still no W3GS

http://bnetdocs.dementedminds.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11

It's on the to-do list.

Edit: W3GS has been added as a packet group. You should be seeing it on BNETDocs Redux. Editors will be now able to add packets specifically for that group.

Edit2: A thread has been opened specifically for contributions for that packet group:

http://bnetdocs.dementedminds.net/forums/viewtopic.php?p=12#12

[rabbit]

I removed all the fonts except Arial and Courier New, and clicked render.  Everything was still in Times New Roman.  Hence, broken.

[Don Cullen]

I removed all the fonts except Arial and Courier New, and clicked render.  Everything was still in Times New Roman.  Hence, broken.

Times New Roman? I just inspected the code line by line for style.css, and I examined your CSS, I see absolutely no mention of Times New Roman. I even went to http://bnetdocs.dementedminds.net, and right clicked, clicked on view source, then I personally examined the source. I see absolutely no mention of the specified font. Are you absolutely sure it's the website, and not your browser? Have you looked at the source code of the page after rendering by right clicking anywhere in the page and clicking view source and examining the source for the font you keep saying you're seeing?

If you can confirm that you found it in the source code, take a screen shot and post it here so I can pinpoint it and fix the problem. Otherwise, the problem is your browser.

In fact, I just personally crawled through the source code removing ALL instances of ANY font.

Aside from the font problem, are you having any problems rendering other stuff, for instance, font size, colors, hiding/showing sections, etc?

Edit: I just checked your CSS code, and I can see you've adjusted the font family to only Arial. So guess what? The CSS rendering is working perfectly. The problem isn't your browser, the problem isn't the CSS renderer. The problem is your CSS code. I'm not sure where exactly, but I'll do research.

Edit2: I copied your CSS code over to my account, then did some experimenting, and found a solution. It was actually quite easy. All I had to do was add this:

Code Select Expand

font-family: arial;

To the body { section of the CSS and I clicked render. The font changed to Arial. So the rendering *DOES* work. You just weren't coding right.

Edit3: I liked Arial so much better, it was more pleasant to read-- I actually felt my eyes exulting in ecstasy. So I went ahead and made it the universial default. If you log out and click refresh, you'll see the majority of the font is now in arial.

Edit4: I took the liberty and edited the CSS code on your account to add the line of code to your body section. You should be seeing the changes the next time you go to the site (or if you logged out previously, the next time you log in). Enjoy.

[Barabajagal]

Just checked it myself, and ya, Firefox's default font is Times New Roman, and that's what was making the page Times New Roman.

[rabbit]

My settings are to render site defined fonts, and only to use specified fonts if the site doesn't say what to use.

Also, it happens in IE.

[Don Cullen]

My settings are to render site defined fonts, and only to use specified fonts if the site doesn't say what to use.

Also, it happens in IE.

Should be fine now. Like I said, the problem was in your CSS code. Your body section was missing the font-family declaration, I added it for you. Should be fine now. The CSS Renderer isn't broken. ;p

Edit: If at first you don't see arial, click refresh.