Upcoming TABLE Code Changes

[Rawhide]

We are going to be updating the forum software soon, and one of the unavoidable results of this is that the existing TABLE code will be changing. As a result, all existing tables in all posts will be broken. They will cease to be displayed as tables and will instead be seen as their raw BB code. (Actually, they would vanish entirely except we'll be doing a mass search-and-replace to switch all existing TABLE tags from square to curly brackets, allowing the text to still be seen).

If you have any posts that you wish to keep tables in—especially homebrew—you will need to manually edit the code once the new software has been installed in order for them to keep being displayed as tables. The new formatting rules are presented in their entirety below, and you can ask for assistance there as well. We're also aware that there are a number of oft-referenced "legacy" homebrew creations where the original creator has since stopped participating actively in the forum altogether. The moderators will be working on updating as many of these popular threads as possible for those who have not visited in a while. Once the forum software has been updated, we will start a thread for posters to suggest specific such threads for the moderators to edit in their creators' absence.

It is also possible—if unlikely—that the find-and-replace might miss a table. If you notice a post with a missing table, you can still access the data within the table by clicking "Quote" (unless the thread has been closed). There is also a small chance that we might run into dawizard (alt) from daparty with dasticks. As with old threads, we will be instituting a reporting system for such instances when they're found.

We understand that this is a huge pain-in-the-ass for posters who have been creating game content on this forum for a long time, but it's an unavoidable side effect of updating the extremely outdated forum software to better serve the entire community. The new code will be more difficult to play with directly, but will ultimately give posters more control over table layouts, enabling new ways of presenting information. Thank you for your patience and understanding during this transition that will ultimately help the Giant in the Playground forums continue into its second decade of service.

[Rawhide]

---

1

Instructions for Reformatting Tables

---

1
In order to prepare you for the changes, I have prepared a simple guide. Due to the nature of the existing TABLE and miscellaneous code, I will be replacing the square brackets with curly braces in this example rather than using noparse.

Existing tables work like this:
{TABLE}Cell 1|Cell 2|Cell 3{/TABLE}
or
{TABLE="HEAD"}Head 1|Head 2|Head 3
Cell 1|Cell 2|Cell 3{/TABLE}

The vertical pipe (|) separates cells, you press Enter for a new row, and in order to make cells using multiple lines, you need to use {BR}.


The new tables work like this:
{table="class: grid"}
{tr}
-----{td}Cell 1{/td}
-----{td}Cell 2{/td}
-----{td}Cell 3{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
-----{td}Cell 4{/td}
-----{td}Cell 5{/td}
-----{td}Cell 6{/td}
{/tr}
{/table}

You will now need to declare the new table (and all of the options), then declare a new table row, then declare a table cell. The "class: grid" is important if you wish to have a grid of lines separating your table cells. Yes, that means that it will be possible to use a table with no gridlines.

The new options include:
width - set the table width (no set width if left off)
class - set the type of lines (no lines if left off, options include: outer_border, grid)
align - position the table (not the text within cells) (left alignment if left off, options include: left, center, right)

You can use multiple options by separating them with a comma. e.g. {table="width: 500, class: outer_border, align: left"}

The {BR} code will be removed completely, as you will now be able to put data on multiple lines by simple use of the Enter key.

Note: There will also be a fancy button that can do all of this for you.

[ChristianSt]

So, does this mean I can format my table-code like I want without worrying that new lines etc. mess up my table? If so, I really like this change :)

Will there be a complete listing of available options? Because your post seem to indicate that there might be more.

[Mando Knight]

Also, how will the fancy button work?

[SiuiS]

This is closer to url than prior. Is that accurate or am I simply tired?

[Fax Celestis]

It's basically square-bracket HTML, yeah.

If this is the case, can I get some of my older threads unlocked?

Also, when is this happening?

[Jasdoif]

In the interests of getting answers I know I'll (likely) need....How will column-spanning for cells be declared (the current {colsp=3} thing)? And will the div BBcode still work?

EDIT: Also, how do we specify table headers? Will we be able to use {th} instead of {td} for header cells, will there be some way to manually format cells, or something else?

[Gullara]

Speaking as someone who works with HTML, I am happy to see this change. It's going to be so much easier to work with tables now.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I'd suggest than rather that attempt to answer each of us individually (and yes, I'll probably would have questions as well), is there an online manual or pdf we can download with the new rules that we could peruse in our own time?

Grey Wolf

[KillianHawkeye]

options include: left, centre, right

Do we have to spell it that way, or can we also use "center"?

[Carl]

So basically same as the old but {tr}{/tr} and {td}{/td} replaces | and the return function.

Damm what an utter screw up of a perfectly usable system.

[Qwertystop]

Hm. Would find-replace
find text|text replace with text{/td}{td}text
and
find text linebreak text (within table brackets) with text{/td} linebreak {td}
and similar work?

I don't know the details, but it feels like since the basic functions are all replaced by different syntax that does the same thing, it could be find-replaced.

[Jasdoif]

Hm. Would find-replace
find text|text replace with text{/td}{td}text
and
find text linebreak text (within table brackets) with text{/td} linebreak {td}
and similar work?

I don't know the details, but it feels like since the basic functions are all replaced by different syntax that does the same thing, it could be find-replaced.

Close, but you'd need to add the {tr} to the start of lines and the {/tr} to the end of lines, to define the table rows.

So replacing the line breaks with

{/td}{/tr}
{tr}{td}

would do it, I think (along with the pipe replacement, of course).

[Qwertystop]

Close, but you'd need to add the {tr} to the start of lines and the {/tr} to the end of lines, to define the table rows.

So replacing the line breaks with

{/td}{/tr}
{tr}{td}

would do it, I think (along with the pipe replacement, of course).

Yeah. And insert linebreaks as necessary around those, for convenience of editing.

[Rawhide]

So, does this mean I can format my table-code like I want without worrying that new lines etc. mess up my table? If so, I really like this change :)

Will there be a complete listing of available options? Because your post seem to indicate that there might be more.

Pretty much. Just a heck of a lot more BBcode.

That is pretty much the full list of what will be available out of the gate.

Also, how will the fancy button work?

You press it, choose some options, then click OK.

This is closer to url than prior. Is that accurate or am I simply tired?

url?

It's basically square-bracket HTML, yeah.

If this is the case, can I get some of my older threads unlocked?

Also, when is this happening?

Depends on why they were locked.

Sometime soonish.

In the interests of getting answers I know I'll (likely) need....How will column-spanning for cells be declared (the current {colsp=3} thing)? And will the div BBcode still work?

EDIT: Also, how do we specify table headers? Will we be able to use {th} instead of {td} for header cells, will there be some way to manually format cells, or something else?

There won't be a way to span columns out of the gate.

There will be no sortable headers, sorry.

I'd suggest than rather that attempt to answer each of us individually (and yes, I'll probably would have questions as well), is there an online manual or pdf we can download with the new rules that we could peruse in our own time?

Grey Wolf

The instructions are listed above in the first reply.

Do we have to spell it that way, or can we also use "center"?

It will have to be spelt the horrible American way, center, because that is the HTML way.

So basically same as the old but {tr}{/tr} and {td}{/td} replaces | and the return function.

Damm what an utter screw up of a perfectly usable system.

Nothing could be done.

Hm. Would find-replace
find text|text replace with text{/td}{td}text
and
find text linebreak text (within table brackets) with text{/td} linebreak {td}
and similar work?

I don't know the details, but it feels like since the basic functions are all replaced by different syntax that does the same thing, it could be find-replaced.

We investigated doing a full find and replace for tables. It was impossible without ruining posts without tables and elements of the post outside of tables.

[Jasdoif]

There will be no sortable headers, sorry.

I was actually wondering about the visual formatting of the headers, not the sorting.

Do you mean there's not a way to access HTML th tags (or something visually similar)?

[Carl]

Nothing could be done.

Um seriously? I'd expect being able to configure separators within coding tags like the table tags to be one of the basic options in your various configuration files back there.

More to the point, could you therefore explain how this is supposed to be an upgrade to the software? Not trying to be snarky here but i don't honestly expect any kind of improvements out of a forum software change who's new software can't handle something as basic as tables in a GUI friendly manner.

Also, clarification, you have vertical separation between the tags in your example, is that actually necessary or can it be laid out:

{tr}{td}Cell 1{/td}{td}Cell 2{/td}{td}Cell 3{/td}{/tr}
{tr}{td}Cell 1{/td}{td}Cell 2{/td}{td}Cell 3{/td}{/tr}

e.t.c.

[Qwertystop]

We investigated doing a full find and replace for tables. It was impossible without ruining posts without tables and elements of the post outside of tables.

No way to say "only look within {TABLE}{/TABLE} tags?

[ShadowFireLance]

We need to find Cipher and get her to update her post.

[erikun]

My biggest concern is, much like regular HTML, for ridiculous values to create ridiculous outputs. I am a bit concerned as to what the width: 500 value would create for a large table, probably breaking the screen width on the post.

Could I recommend a reasonable limit on the width value?

[ChristianSt]

Um seriously? I'd expect being able to configure separators within coding tags like the table tags to be one of the basic options in your various configuration files back there.

More to the point, could you therefore explain how this is supposed to be an upgrade to the software? Not trying to be snarky here but i don't honestly expect any kind of improvements out of a forum software change who's new software can't handle something as basic as tables in a GUI friendly manner.

Also, clarification, you have vertical separation between the tags in your example, is that actually necessary or can it be laid out:

{tr}{td}Cell 1{/td}{td}Cell 2{/td}{td}Cell 3{/td}{/tr}
{tr}{td}Cell 1{/td}{td}Cell 2{/td}{td}Cell 3{/td}{/tr}

e.t.c.

I guess it is a matter of tastes, but I personally think it is a really good upgrade. I really hate the current/old(?) system of "|" and "\n". It just makes it really messy to organize big tables. [In fact I did find it easier to write a Perl script to write BBcode for it instead of manipulating the BBcode myself...]
Sure it will be a bit harder to crank out a small table, but Rawhide even said there will be GUI-support for it (which should make it much easier!). But I really am looking forward to be able to put the content of each cell in a separate rows.

And I can't say anything sure on it, but I would it find really strange if the whitespace outside of the cells does matter. (If that would be the case, then I would say it would be an downgrade.)



@erikun: I would assume that it is handled exactly as it is now (since you can already supply a width option with the current tables). So if you don't need a particular width, just don't use that option and let the table figure it out somehow.

[Carl]

@Christian: Um hows it any better? it's the same system except with stupidly long separator tags.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

No way to say "only look within {TABLE}{/TABLE} tags?

it probably could be done for posts containing a single table:

Update Posts
Set body = left(body, charindex(body, '{table}')) + (sql code to transform the table: a bunch of replaces on the string between the two tags) + right(body, len(body)-charindex(body, '{/table}'))
where body like '%{table}%'
--Confirm that there is only one table tag:
and charindex(body, '{table}', charindex(body, '{table}')+1)=0

But it could get very messy for more than one table in the same post: SQL doesn't really provide the kind of iterating tools and functions you would need.

(Qwerty, if you want me to bore your ear off with SQL logic, drop me a PM)

Grey Wolf, most definitely NOT offering advice on how to approach the change - just explaining the dangers of doing so with SQL

[Qwertystop]

Hm. For multi-table posts, what would happen? The first table is fixed, the rest ignored, or would things break?

[Rawhide]

I was actually wondering about the visual formatting of the headers, not the sorting.

Do you mean there's not a way to access HTML th tags (or something visually similar)?

Experimenting has shown... you can! Apparently.

At any rate, due to the fact that it is more aligned with real HTML and supports setting the class, we can (and might) make new classes for you to use in the future.

Um seriously? I'd expect being able to configure separators within coding tags like the table tags to be one of the basic options in your various configuration files back there.

More to the point, could you therefore explain how this is supposed to be an upgrade to the software? Not trying to be snarky here but i don't honestly expect any kind of improvements out of a forum software change who's new software can't handle something as basic as tables in a GUI friendly manner.

Also, clarification, you have vertical separation between the tags in your example, is that actually necessary or can it be laid out:

{tr}{td}Cell 1{/td}{td}Cell 2{/td}{td}Cell 3{/td}{/tr}
{tr}{td}Cell 1{/td}{td}Cell 2{/td}{td}Cell 3{/td}{/tr}

e.t.c.

Yes. Seriously.

Because the entire board is being upgraded, not just TABLE code.

You can do it however you like. However, your method is not done in a GUI friendly manner. That's why there are line breaks and indentations, to make it easier to create and edit. These line breaks and indentations are made automatically by the TABLE button GUI.

No way to say "only look within {TABLE}{/TABLE} tags?

No safe way to do it.

[Prime32]

I'm curious, where did the current table code come from? And are there any details available on what new software the boards will be using?

[Rawhide]

I'm curious, where did the current table code come from? And are there any details available on what new software the boards will be using?

We're using 3.6, which had no native TABLE code, so we inserted one. We're upgrading to 4.x, which has native TABLE handling. The two are not compatible. I tried for a while to make the two work side-by-side, but it just wasn't possible.

The new code closely follows standard HTML, while the current code was designed to make it simpler.

[TuggyNE]

We're using 3.6, which had no native TABLE code, so we inserted one. We're upgrading to 4.x, which has native TABLE handling.

Hurray, I now know what version you're using!

Also, a couple of userscripts are likely to start working in the not-too-distant future, which is handy.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by ShadowFireLance
We need to find Cipher and get her to update her post.

That was my absolute first thought when I saw this. Is she still around?

[Carl]

Yes. Seriously.

Because the entire board is being upgraded, not just TABLE code.

You can do it however you like. However, your method is not done in a GUI friendly manner. That's why there are line breaks and indentations, to make it easier to create and edit. These line breaks and indentations are made automatically by the TABLE button GUI.

I understand your upgrading the whole board. But i expect an upgrade to improve the usability of basic functions, not degrade them. if it does degrade them, i'm going to assume it's degraded a bunch of other stuff, or at least failed to improve them.

Though since you mentioned the table code was your own invention i guess it makes sense now. I thought it was your systems developers taking a backwards step.

Not sure what your getting at with the GUI friendly comment. But here's an example screen grab of my standard D&D3.5 class template's table section:



That table can be read as a table which makes it actually possible to use your existing table code for me, without that layout functionality i'd be pretty screwed for getting the right data in the right cell.

Anyway, like i said, not trying to be snarky, i assumed the functionality was changed by whoever develops the software your using, and that didn;t herald good thing for the ease of use of the rest of the software if they'd added that much extra typing to something so basic.