Better signature limiting options

[Julie]

A [IMG] link, point to (36.jpg) is 79277 bytes in size, that is 58305 bytes over the allowed limit of 20972 bytes.

Is there a way to perhaps show it as kb, instead of bytes? This is just me being picky though :P

BUT! I did notice that when you had more than one "violation", it just displayed one:

[IMG]http://www.toobigimageinbyteshere.something[/img*]
gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg g

Error:
The following errors occurred when this message was submitted:

1. Line 2, word 1 is 101 characters long. A single word is allowed to be a maximum 30 characters.

But, when you fix the error displayed, and you click save, it'll show the other one. But it would be good to have all the errors at once

[why-not]

Originally Posted by Julieh

Is there a way to perhaps show it as kb, instead of bytes? This is just me being picky though :P

BUT! I did notice that when you had more than one "violation", it just displayed one:



Error:
The following errors occurred when this message was submitted:

1. Line 2, word 1 is 101 characters long. A single word is allowed to be a maximum 30 characters.

But, when you fix the error displayed, and you click save, it'll show the other one. But it would be good to have all the errors at once

Hi

The reason why it does this, is that the signature (text) is validated before any (images) are validated. There is no sense to run a (remote) system call to validate images if the signature (text) has errors! I did it this way to save resources! I could do it the way you want, but it is not the best appoach to take! I will do this though, add a option to the Admin Configuration, that does it my way and also allows for doing it your un-resource friendly way!

Sonia

[Julie]

Oh okay, I don't know much about coding and queries and such, but I just thought a user might get a little pissed for having to edit his/her sig again and again and again :P

But hey, you're the coder, you know best I really appreciate you coding this!

[trulylowcarb]

Tried the demo, and left some feedback in the demo forum.... go Sonia, go .... ^5!

[why-not]

Someone asked about the image validation so I will explain it!

Validation on images is done using (2) passes, The first pass validates the image size allowed for the user group the member is assigned to!

If the size is below the maximum allowed, the second question is pushed to the remote server to get the other information (height, width)!

I use (2) passes, because we don't want to download a image that violates the maximum size rule, this is to make the process as system friendly as possible! This is all done using one single process, and a special (request header) that all servers understand, so we only use one remote call per image validation, talking to the remote server in a special way. I also only use one remote call if there are (1) or more images in a signature and those images are all on the same remote server!

I have put a lot of time in load tesing and trying my best to make this very system friendly! Sure I know of easier ways to deal with image validation, but they are very resource intense. Which is what I do not want and you will not want, this is one of those times that one would need to reinvent the wheel, and that is what I did!

Sonia

[BPnet]

Originally Posted by why-not

I final have the public demo up... (you can try it!)

http://forum.ya-right.com/index.php?

you need to create an account to demo the control, no validation needed!


I will be releasing it on Sunday, I just need to finish a few minor things (more phrases) for the extra stuff I added and the (help system / Forum Facts) needs to be updated to add the information for the new options!


I think I may have went a little over board, but total control you will have!!!


c, ya...

Sonia

Excellent! I am looking forward to your final release, Sonia. I appreciate the hard work you've put into this.

[ThePimp]

There should also be a text box that allows you to put in a replacement sig if the above specs are not met. Like if the size is too large, it would be replaced by a default sig. If no sig data is input, it would still show no sig, but if there is one, and it's out of compliance, the default kicks in.

[why-not]

Originally Posted by ThePimp

There should also be a text box that allows you to put in a replacement sig if the above specs are not met. Like if the size is too large, it would be replaced by a default sig. If no sig data is input, it would still show no sig, but if there is one, and it's out of compliance, the default kicks in.

What would be the point of that?

Signature validation is to make sure the signature complies to your forum rules! If there is a problem then the user will be told about the problem right at edit time! So I don't see a need for a replacement signature! Maybe I am not understanding you, if you could explain in more detail it would help me understand what you are saying!

Sonia

[trulylowcarb]

I was just coming here to say that I would prefer NOT to see a default signature, personally...
(Just my 2cents)

[007]

This hack would be great. I know how to code it but don't have any time now. I would certainly install it though!

All I really care about is a usergroup based signature:

Allow usergroup to use signatures? Yes/No

That would fix so many problems.