| Uwe wrote: |
|
Hello,
I just made an update from version V2.7.0-1964 to V2.7.0-1985 and I am receiving now the error message Unknown toolbar item 'ShowBlocks' whenever creating or editing an entry. When clicking onto Ok, everything seems to work fine. Can you help please? Error message occurs in Internet Explorer and also in Firefox.
|
Re: Unknown toolbar item 'ShowBlocks', posted by Stefan Ritt on Thu Jan 10 16:31:22 2008
|
| Uwe wrote: |
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
| Uwe wrote: |
|
Hello,
I just made an update from version V2.7.0-1964 to V2.7.0-1985 and I am receiving now the error message Unknown toolbar item 'ShowBlocks' whenever creating or editing an entry. When clicking onto Ok, everything seems to work fine. Can you help please? Error message occurs in Internet Explorer and also in Firefox.
|
|
|
The intermediate elog version 2.7.0-3 had a bug which truncated some entries (just like the one where I reply to). This has been fixed in release 2.7.0-4. So please everybody who uses 2.7.0-3 do an update. |
Configuration of HTML editor, posted by Kristján Jónsson on Thu Jan 10 18:30:26 2008
|
Do I have to do any extra configuration in elog to enable the FCKeditor.
What I get with V2.7.0-1954 is that the main message entry field looks and behaves identically whether I set the encoding to HTML or plain (except the width and height of the field changes).
ELCode works as expected. Message files saved with the encoding set to HTML have a line "Encoding: HTML", but no HTML markup. Those saved with encoding set to plain have the line "Encoding: plain", but are otherwise identical.
I have the scripts directory as set up by "make install" containing the elcode.js file and the fckeditor subdirectory. All are world readable.
Any hints about what could be the problem?
Thanks
Kristján
|
|
Re: Configuration of HTML editor, posted by Stefan Ritt on Fri Jan 11 08:08:51 2008
|
| Kristján Jónsson wrote: |
|
Do I have to do any extra configuration in elog to enable the FCKeditor.
What I get with V2.7.0-1954 is that the main message entry field looks and behaves identically whether I set the encoding to HTML or plain (except the width and height of the field changes).
ELCode works as expected. Message files saved with the encoding set to HTML have a line "Encoding: HTML", but no HTML markup. Those saved with encoding set to plain have the line "Encoding: plain", but are otherwise identical.
I have the scripts directory as set up by "make install" containing the elcode.js file and the fckeditor subdirectory. All are world readable.
Any hints about what could be the problem?
|
Version 1954 is a bit old. Please update to the current SVN version and try again. There must be a file elog/scripts/fckeditor/fckeditor.js which was missing at some time.
|
|
Re: Configuration of HTML editor, posted by Kristján Jónsson on Fri Jan 11 14:33:58 2008
|
| Stefan Ritt wrote: |
|
| Kristján Jónsson wrote: |
|
Do I have to do any extra configuration in elog to enable the FCKeditor.
What I get with V2.7.0-1954 is that the main message entry field looks and behaves identically whether I set the encoding to HTML or plain (except the width and height of the field changes).
ELCode works as expected. Message files saved with the encoding set to HTML have a line "Encoding: HTML", but no HTML markup. Those saved with encoding set to plain have the line "Encoding: plain", but are otherwise identical.
I have the scripts directory as set up by "make install" containing the elcode.js file and the fckeditor subdirectory. All are world readable.
Any hints about what could be the problem?
|
Version 1954 is a bit old. Please update to the current SVN version and try again. There must be a file elog/scripts/fckeditor/fckeditor.js which was missing at some time.
|
Excellent, works as expected now, thanks.
Didn't realise how far behind the SVN version elog-latest.tar.gz is.
|
|
Audit Trail?, posted by Javier A. Ortiz on Fri Jan 18 13:57:31 2008
|
First thanks for the great software! My only question would be how to implement audit trail feature. I know you can control who edits and that's great but in regulated environments like mine there's a requirement that the original record, the one edited, is not deleted or overwritten. If not possible right now the only thing I could think of is a mechanism, maybe possible thru configuration, that when the record is edited it is copied to an audit trail logbook (i.e. if logbook name is 'test' it's audit logbook will be named 'test-audit' which is read only) and have a link to the audit trail of the record (show only changes of the current record).
I'm more than aware that it's possible thru configuration but I'm short on that dept. Any help/idea?
Thanks in advance! |
|
Re: Audit Trail?, posted by Stefan Ritt on Fri Jan 18 14:20:29 2008
|
| Javier A. Ortiz wrote: |
|
First thanks for the great software! My only question would be how to implement audit trail feature. I know you can control who edits and that's great but in regulated environments like mine there's a requirement that the original record, the one edited, is not deleted or overwritten. If not possible right now the only thing I could think of is a mechanism, maybe possible thru configuration, that when the record is edited it is copied to an audit trail logbook (i.e. if logbook name is 'test' it's audit logbook will be named 'test-audit' which is read only) and have a link to the audit trail of the record (show only changes of the current record).
I'm more than aware that it's possible thru configuration but I'm short on that dept. Any help/idea?
|
You can achieve this via replies. First you disable any edits on the original message by removing the Edit command via 'Menu commands' or by using 'Restrict edit time' appropriately. If someone wants to edit an entry, she or he makes a reply. If the original entry is formatted with ELCode, it will be enclosed by a [quote] tag, which can be easily removed. Then the text can be edited and submitted. This way you get the history of an entry in a chain of replies. That's the only way I see to accomplish this functionality.
|