Why isn't [quote] the same as [q]?

St Leo · October 29, 2003, 22:40

Is the annoying way in which quote refuses to be quoted intentional? I find having to rename quote manually to q in order to let people quote whom I've quoted very irritating.

Just wondering.

Tuberski · October 29, 2003, 22:58

Quote:

Originally posted by St Leo
Is the annoying way in which quote refuses to be quoted intentional? I find having to rename quote manually to q in order to let people quote whom I've quoted very irritating.

Just wondering.

Huh?

I think I have an idea but maybe I don't.....

ACK!

St Leo · October 29, 2003, 23:30

When you click on Reply with Quote, all the quoted stuff in the post disappears. On the other hand, all the qed stuff remains.

quote and q are synonyms.

Tuberski · October 30, 2003, 00:42

That is what I thought you meant..

I knew q and quote were the same thing.

You want to be able to quote a quoted....quote.

ACK!

ixnay · October 30, 2003, 01:00

Quote:

maybe

Quote:

it's to

Quote:

avoid

Quote:

lots of

Quote:

nested quotes

Nubclear · October 30, 2003, 01:04

Quote:

Originally posted by ixnay

Quote:

maybe

Quote:

it's to

Quote:

[/quote]

[/QUOTE]

And if you quote something with a lot of quotes, then it looks strange. Watch!

Dauphin · October 30, 2003, 02:49

What is this threads spam quota?

DrSpike · October 30, 2003, 05:52

Well it was a fair question. But I think the answer is already in, namely that the default is non-nested because otherwise it could get cluttered.

Skanky Burns · October 30, 2003, 07:19

But then the question stands as to why [q] does still allow itself to be quoted. Although I have a feeling that the answer lies in lack of effort in implementing that feature rather than a concious design decision.

Alex · October 30, 2003, 14:46

Sometimes is useful to quote someone who was quoted in another post.

DrSpike · October 30, 2003, 15:03

True, but that doesn't explain the discrepancy.

Dauphin · October 30, 2003, 21:51

It is annoying, and would be solved by branching threads.

vovan · October 30, 2003, 22:22

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike
True, but that doesn't explain the discrepancy.

I'm guessing when someone (re?)wrote the stuff that goes on when one clicks the "Reply with Quote" button, they forgot to add the automatic removal of the q tag. Either that, or the q tag was introduced after the code for removing the quote tags was written, and so someone forgot to update the code.

That's the most likely reason for the discrepancy, it seems to me.

GhengisFarb™ · October 30, 2003, 22:44

Maybe they wanted there to be a differentation between quote and q.

And branching theads solve nothing. Just say no.

St Leo · October 31, 2003, 21:19

quote should not be stripped and q most certainly should be stripped.

ixnay · October 31, 2003, 22:08

Quote:

I'm guessing when someone (re?)wrote the stuff that goes on when one clicks the "Reply with Quote" button, they forgot to add the automatic removal of the q tag. Either that, or the q tag was introduced after the code for removing the quote tags was written, and so someone forgot to update the code.

I've only seen the [q] tag on Apolyton, so I'd guess that it was added on by the owners here, to make it so that you didn't have to type out 'quote' every time you wanted to quote something.

Kuciwalker · November 1, 2003, 02:14

Why can't it use the [q] tag by default, and let us change it to the [quote] if we don't want nesting? It's really annoying to change it manually.

Buck Birdseed · November 1, 2003, 15:39

I'm the person who originally asked for the q tag way back when, and IIRC all Markos did was copy the section of code that governs quote and change all the relevant occurances to q. However, all other code that relates to quoting still uses the q tag, for instance the "quote this post" button and the quote tag button in the posting interface thingy.