Re: Can't set Author attribute properly in reply?, posted by Emiliano Gabrielli on Tue Jul 26 12:02:35 2005
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
| Emiliano Gabrielli wrote: | | The following code will assure that, if the HTML generated by elog would be modified by hand by a malicious user the server can still preset the author field with the right $long_name? |
Ok, you're right. But that requires quite some knowledge to change the generated HTML by hand. So for paranoiac people the "Subst" might be better. Actually you could have both the "Preset on Reply" and the "Subst on Reply", so on the reply entry form one sees already the correct author. |
It's my actual configuration infact  |
Re: Can't set Author attribute properly in reply?, posted by Chris Green on Tue Jul 26 17:32:59 2005
|
Thanks for this, gents.
Chris. |
New and reply pages don't use Page Title, posted by Chris Green on Tue Jul 26 17:41:10 2005
|
Is this intentional, or can it be changed? I'd like every page associated with a particular logbook to use that logbook's page title as at least part of its own.
Also, is it possible to have a reply comment in the same way as one has a message comment?
Thanks,
Chris. |
|
Re: New and reply pages don't use Page Title, posted by Stefan Ritt on Tue Jul 26 20:23:33 2005
|
| Chris Green wrote: | | I'd like every page associated with a particular logbook to use that logbook's page title as at least part of its own. |
On the list page, you can use "summary page title = <title>". Since this option is misleading, I renamed it to "List page title = <title>". Then I added "edit page title = <title>". Modifications are in CVS.
| Chris Green wrote: | | Also, is it possible to have a reply comment in the same way as one has a message comment? |
I added "reply comment = <comment>"
So, that gave another two options. With all that many options it's hard to read through the configuration documentation. So if you have time and fun doing it, you could restructure the documentation page into some separate pages, to give people a better overview. Please send the modified pages back to me and I will include them on the web site. |
|
Re: New and reply pages don't use Page Title, posted by Chris Green on Tue Jul 26 21:05:26 2005
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: | | So if you have time and fun doing it, you could restructure the documentation page into some separate pages, to give people a better overview. Please send the modified pages back to me and I will include them on the web site. |
I'll try to put this together in the next week or two. Thanks for all your help,
Chris. |
attribute of type "datetime" sorted incorrectly, posted by Kees Bol on Wed Jul 27 16:46:44 2005 
|
In order to enter different logdates we created the attribute 'Logdate' as follows:
...
Attributes = Logdate, Author, Type, Subject
Type Logdate = datetime
Preset Logdate = $date
List Display = ID, Logdate, Author, Type, Subject
Start page = ?rsort=Logdate
Time format = "%d-%b-%y %H:%M"
Date format = %d-%b-%y
...
However some unexpected things happen:
1) when sorting on Logdate the sorting is incorrect
2) I expected some kind of fieldchecking when filling this field, however you can enter any text.
What goes wrong here?
Thanks |
|
Email subject garbaged when set?, posted by Chris Green on Wed Jul 27 17:30:38 2005
|
Hi,
So I'm using the CVS version now since I was hoping this would be fixed. If I set the email subject explicitly, viz:
Use Email Subject = [BooNE-ELOG] New submission to $logbook from $Author
The email I get has:
Subject:
=?ISO-8859-1?B?W0Jvb05FLUVMT0ddIE5ldyBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHRvIENoYXJnZWQgQ3Vyc
mVudCBQaSBQbHVzIGZyb20gQ2hyaXMgR3JlZW4=?=
... which isn't particularly illuminating.
Advice appreciated.
Thanks,
Chris. |
|
Re: attribute of type "datetime" sorted incorrectly, posted by Stefan Ritt on Wed Jul 27 21:22:47 2005
|
| Kees Bol wrote: | | What goes wrong here? |
The wrong sorting is a mystery to me. I redid what you have, and entered exactly the same entries, and got following:
As you can see, the sorting is quite different. What happens if you reload the page, what if you restart elogd?
As for the missing validity check for the date field, all what was missing was the year check. I added that. |