Garmin Drive 51 LMT

[Derek Uzzell]

Deneb - 2019-11-12 3:11 PM

 

Derek Uzzell - 2019-11-12 2:42 PM

For me .pdf files attach exactly as other files do. Up to 200KB size they will attach; over 200KB they won’t and an error message displays.

 

Compared to .jpg or .png file attachments, (as perhaps one might anticipate) the .pdf files do not appear as an image on the posting and - like .jpeg files - it’s necessary to click on the image-name link to view them.

 

That is the behaviour I would expect, but if it works for you I think you must be special!

 

Funny you should say that...

 

As I was mindlessly raking up barrowloads of leaves in my garden, I wondered why Keithl and I can attach files over 100KB in size whereas you, Brian, Robinhood, etc. cannot. Then I realised that Keithl and I are both Moderators and Moderators have supplementary capabilities to non-Moderator forum members.

 

So I’m guessing that a 100KB file-size limit has always applied to ‘ordinary’ forum members, but Moderators have always been able to attach files up to 200KB in size. I’ve yet to test this hypothesis, but it seems to fit in with what’s happening. However, even if this turns out to be the case (and Keith and I are indeed ’special’) I can’t see it affecting why you and Brian have to click on an image-name link to view an attachment as other ‘ordinary’ forum members don’t seem to need to do this.

 

Subsequent testing proved that forum Moderators can attach files up tp 200KB in size, whereas the maximum file-size for non-Moderator people is 100KB.

[Derek Uzzell]

Brian Kirby - 2019-11-12 3:33 PM

Robinhood - 2019-11-12 3:12 PM...I've never been able to attach any file above 100K in size.Conversely, I've never had problems with uploaded/attached .jpg files displaying at the bottom of the post (no need to click the link).AFAIK, the only way to get pictures to display "in-line" in text, is to externally host them and use bulletin board markup or HTML to embed the link at the point where you wish the image to display. https://i.ibb.co/X3Np21d/DSC00714.jpgLike the above, and I'm pretty sure that size limits don't apply in this case.

Well that works for me, and I can see the image fine - but I've no idea what you're talking about!! :-D

It evidently is possible to directly drag an image into a posting if the “Use rich edit box when composing messages” option is set to Yes in one’s forum Profile. It will be seen that I’ve inserted an image of my hero in my posting at the top of 12 November 2019 7:53 AM above.

My iMac’s software and the rich edit word-processing feature have an uncomfortable relationship, but the feature may work better on a PC/Windows platform.

(I just mention the capability in passing...)

[Robinhood]

The rich text editing option gives many of the extra options available on other forums, (including the ability easily to specify the URL of a picture which is hosted elsewhere which you wish to display).

 

It doesn't play well with my machine either (and hasn't historically) but since most of the basic special editing results in 'easy to remember' text "markup", I find it easier not to use it and simply to insert the appropriate editing myself.

 

(Inserting pictures "manually" is a bit more difficult).

 

The different treatment of the links may well be down to browser (either different browser or different browser options), but works for me on both Chrome and Edge.

[Brian Kirby]

I seem to remember that the main reason not to use the rich edit facility was that, when posted, black text appeared as a grey that many people found difficult to read on screen.  So, this is an experiment.

So far, so good!  :-D  Derek's 12 November 2019 7:53 AM post now shows a Trump pic, but my 51kb windscreen pic doesn't show.  Strange stuff!

[Keithl]

Brian Kirby - 2019-11-13 12:42 PM

I seem to remember that the main reason not to use the rich edit facility was that, when posted, black text appeared as a grey that many people found difficult to read on screen.  So, this is an experiment.

So far, so good!  :-D

No it's not!!!The rich edit text is definitely feint compared to the start of your posting and should be banned!!! :D Keith.

[Brian Kirby]

It's OK on my screen!  :-D 

[Derek Uzzell]

As will (hopefully) be seen from this posting, the full scope of the rich edit feature seems to be available provided that Mozilla's Firefox browser is used

Funny you should say that...

As I was mindlessly raking up barrowloads of leaves in my garden, I wondered why Keithl and I can attach files over 100KB in size whereas you, Brian, Robinhood, etc. cannot. Then I realised that Keithl and I are both Moderators and Moderators have supplementary capabilities to non-Moderator forum members. 

[Deneb]

A bit bright for my eyes Derek, and also doesn't display as you probably intended on my PC either:

[Derek Uzzell]

I’m not too surprised.

 

My normal web-browser is Apple’s Safari and, when I’ve previously experimented with the forums’ rich edit feature, I’ve always received the following message

 

Mozilla < 1.3 Beta is not supported!

I'll try, though, but it might not work.

 

So it seemed that, if I used Mozilla’s Firefox browser instead of Safari, there was a sporting chance that rich edit would function better. This seems to be the case for me, but even if all forum members used Firefox, it’s doubtful that everybody would obtain the same functionality or the same ‘look’.

 

I don’t think anything significant has been done to develop the software that drives the forums since their inception in 2006, and I’m not sure how much testing was done then. In fact, it’s a wonder that the forums still function as well as they do...