[Forum] Add BBCode support for [table][/table]

[ender516]

Concise description:

• The BBCode constructs of [table][[/table], [tr][/tr], and [td][/td] allow forum posters to construct tables of information without pasting in images or painful exercises in code boxes with monospaced text. However, the current CC forum does not support this feature.

Specifics/Details:

• Modify the phpBB code to support this feature. This may be something already available from phpBB, or we may need some development done. The phpBB website does seem to have an active community, but I am not familiar enough with it to say just what it would entail to implement my suggestion.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• In the Map Foundry in particular, tables of information can be very useful for discussion and development. Being able to avoid the intermediate steps of creating an image, posting it to a sharing site, and inserting an image link would be very welcome.

[iamkoolerthanu]

I might use this for tournaments, if it wasn't too complicated to use

[ender516]

You can see an example of this on the BBCode Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBCode

Basically, the [table][/table] construct surrounds [tr][/tr] (table row) which surrounds [td][/td] (table data). It might get a bit bulky, but should be straightforward to use.

[rdsrds2120]

I had brought this up to Andy a while ago, and I think they put it down to be worked on so that it could be operable with less tags. Good suggestion nonetheless, however.

-rd

[greenoaks]

it would make my life easier as a TO. i have a lot of tournaments where i use the code tags to create a table showing win/lost for each player.

great idea

[natty dread]

I like this suggestion!

[AndyDufresne]

Blakebowling actually did some work on this, but his solution to getting such BBCode was something like 6 separate BBCodes that work together to make a table, which seemed very un-userfriendly. However, I think he was onto a much better solution with only 1 BBCode. Perhaps I'll see if I can jump start that again.


--Andy

[Metsfanmax]

I had brought this up to Andy a while ago, and I think they put it down to be worked on so that it could be operable with less tags. Good suggestion nonetheless, however.

-rd

A latex style table input with "&" separating cells and "\\" ending rows would be a good idea, for example. But then I guess you'd need a way to escape an & symbol if you actually needed it in your table.

[ender516]

I had brought this up to Andy a while ago, and I think they put it down to be worked on so that it could be operable with less tags. Good suggestion nonetheless, however.

-rd

A latex style table input with "&" separating cells and "\\" ending rows would be a good idea, for example. But then I guess you'd need a way to escape an & symbol if you actually needed it in your table.

The standard(?) method of [td][/td] around cells and [tr][/tr] around rows would not be much more to type, and the system already has to recognize [anything][/anything]. It's probably better not to throw different syntactical forms into the mix.

[greenoaks]

I had brought this up to Andy a while ago, and I think they put it down to be worked on so that it could be operable with less tags. Good suggestion nonetheless, however.

-rd

A latex style table input with "&" separating cells and "\\" ending rows would be a good idea, for example. But then I guess you'd need a way to escape an & symbol if you actually needed it in your table.

The standard(?) method of [td][/td] around cells and [tr][/tr] around rows would not be much more to type, and the system already has to recognize [anything][/anything]. It's probably better not to throw different syntactical forms into the mix.

i'd be happy to use the 3 codes to bring a table together if they implement it as i can't imagine how 1 BBCode would know where my cells & rows end

[Metsfanmax]

I had brought this up to Andy a while ago, and I think they put it down to be worked on so that it could be operable with less tags. Good suggestion nonetheless, however.

-rd

A latex style table input with "&" separating cells and "\\" ending rows would be a good idea, for example. But then I guess you'd need a way to escape an & symbol if you actually needed it in your table.

The standard(?) method of [td][/td] around cells and [tr][/tr] around rows would not be much more to type, and the system already has to recognize [anything][/anything]. It's probably better not to throw different syntactical forms into the mix.

You or I might think that, having worked with, say, HTML for many years. But I'm not convinced that the "average" forum-goer would find this mix of syntax confusing, since many don't have a reasonable expectation of what code should look like anyway.

[dowian2]

I'm in favor of this suggestion as well. Would be very useful for tournaments.

[ender516]

I had brought this up to Andy a while ago, and I think they put it down to be worked on so that it could be operable with less tags. Good suggestion nonetheless, however.

-rd

A latex style table input with "&" separating cells and "\\" ending rows would be a good idea, for example. But then I guess you'd need a way to escape an & symbol if you actually needed it in your table.

The standard(?) method of [td][/td] around cells and [tr][/tr] around rows would not be much more to type, and the system already has to recognize [anything][/anything]. It's probably better not to throw different syntactical forms into the mix.

You or I might think that, having worked with, say, HTML for many years. But I'm not convinced that the "average" forum-goer would find this mix of syntax confusing, since many don't have a reasonable expectation of what code should look like anyway.

Maybe so, but mixing syntax leads to weird stuff. As it is now, if your post has something in square brackets, it is special, otherwise it is plain text. I wouldn't want to have to watch for other special strings as well. But, in the end, what really matters is a feature that works. The rest is detail.

[Metsfanmax]

Maybe so, but mixing syntax leads to weird stuff. As it is now, if your post has something in square brackets, it is special, otherwise it is plain text. I wouldn't want to have to watch for other special strings as well. But, in the end, what really matters is a feature that works. The rest is detail.

Absolutely. I don't want to bog this thread down with syntax discussions anyway. Let it suffice to say that this would be a neat thing to implement, although perhaps with not too grand of a scope outside Tournaments.

[rdsrds2120]

The Academy might be able to find use for this. Keeping charts of progress for students, perhaps.

-rd