• Welcome to Simple Machines Community Forum. Please login or sign up.
December 03, 2021, 08:45:59 PM

News:

Wondering if this will always be free?  See why free is better.


Ability to remove images from signatures

Started by ADoomedMarine, August 21, 2004, 02:01:28 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

ディン1031

Quote from: Elijah Bliss on April 04, 2005, 07:12:46 PM
Is it possible to use this to only display one or two images max in a sig?
I've write something for my forum to limit the pictures in a signature. 
If you want to know how it work i can write oder pm it to you (but i must first look, how did i can make it... *sneakaway*)
Support only via MOD Thread! NO PM Support!
My Forum: ayu][kult Forum
My Mods: My Small Mod Collection
My Parser: DIN1031's ModParser
Current Info: More away the next days, because i've to much work to do :x

Gwion

Works fine! :)

I only have one problem - after the change members who had an image only in the signature do no longer have the option to enter any signature in their profile. There is no longer a field displayed. Members who only had text in the signature are not affected.
Since I would like to allow text signatures - can I get this back?
The theme I am using is autumn-dark with SMF 1.1. RC2

tomis

Kudos [unknown] for the nifty css hack to supress images in signatures.  I say it's a hack because the user can still add the image to the sig, but it's just not displayed.

I would really like to see a place in admin where I can define what BBCode tags are allowed in the sigs.  I would work just like defining what's allowed in posts.  And I'd even like to see a couple more options for admin to decide as well.

For signatures:
1. define what BBCode tags are allowed
2. define how many lines are allowed.
3. define max font size allowed.
4. define max # of links allowed.

This will permit admin to keep bandwith usage down (disallowing images/flash etc) and cut down on spam/junky looking sigs. as well.

As a side note, in the profile edit pages, where you edit your signature, it should have the buttons for putting in the BBCode (like when posting). C'mon this is 2006, we should have to do things manually when they can be automated.
~

Anguz

tomis, just a few thoughts on what you say. If you make it simpler for users to add code, they'll add more of it, which you're trying to prevent. Also, how often does one modify the sig? Although it's uncomfortable to do it with a lot of code by hand, it's only very few times during your membership. Also, the bandwidth is not the problem, but rather the ammount of space the sigs take what is being tried to control with this topic's tip.
Cristián Lávaque http://cristianlavaque.com

tomis

Quote from: Anguz on May 11, 2006, 03:19:26 AM
If you make it simpler for users to add code, they'll add more of it, which you're trying to prevent.
That's like trying to have security by obscurity, it's simply not security.  I think we should have the buttons there for convenience, and have admin-defineable limits for the sigs.  Only the BBC tags that admin allows for sigs would have the buttons there for users to add the code.  Then as admin you could allow only bold, italics, underline colors & links (for example).  In admin you would also define a hard limit for number of chars (255 for example) in sig, number of lines in sig and max font size.  This way the user has more convenience than currently, and the admin can keep the forum from looking so spammy.  We're not actually trying to prevent adding more code, we're trying to allow it in a controlled environment.

Quote from: Anguz on May 11, 2006, 03:19:26 AM
Also, how often does one modify the sig? Although it's uncomfortable to do it with a lot of code by hand, it's only very few times during your membership.
It all depends, some people change it every week or so- that's more than a few times during membership hopefully.

Quote from: Anguz on May 11, 2006, 03:19:26 AM
Also, the bandwidth is not the problem, but rather the ammount of space the sigs take what is being tried to control with this topic's tip.
I agree, that keeping the forum looking nice is the main interest, but if you're not going to show the whole image, why have the user download it only to hide it (or part of it) with css?  That's definitly a non-solution. :)  The benefit of enforcing these limits at the time of creating the signature, is that then all the superfluous data is not stored in the DB and downloaded by each and every viewer.

My only motivation for expressing these views is that I love SMF and I want it to get better. :)

So basically what this could look like in the admin panel would be:

Signature Configuration

  • Set max number of lines allowable
  • Set overall limit on sig. length (in chars)
  • List of checkboxes to define what BBC code is allowed in signatures
  • If IMG is allowed:

    • Set max number of images allowable
    • Set max image width allowable
    • Set max image height allowable
  • if SIZE is allowed

    • Set max fontsize allowable
  • if URL is allowed

    • Set max number of live links allowable

Then this stuff would be enforced when the user saves their signature, and kick back an error, if it doesn't comply.
~

iv_nik

Is there any simple ability to remove images that exceed particular size? For examle I want users have only "userbar-sized" images, 350 x 19 pixels, not more.

Anguz

May 12, 2006, 02:18:29 AM #26 Last Edit: May 12, 2006, 02:20:27 AM by Anguz
tomis, I think your points are valid, what I said in my other reply was mostly the way I think about it for my own forum, but not in a generic way, just expressing my opinion.

The one of the suggestions that you give that insterests me the most is the one where you can select the bbcode that'd be parsed, mostly because it's something that I have already had an interest on.

You may, or not, know that I worked quite a bit with the bbcode parser, and I have many ideas for it that I never actually developed. One of them was adding permissions, or selectiveness, for where the code is being used, like in sigs or boards, or by whom it's being used or viewed.

It's still something that I get interested on again from time to time, but at the same time one of those things that aren't really a priority and just stay in a would-be-nice-to-do list.

I hope someone actually does give more control to sigs some day for the users like you. I personally would just remove the parsing from sigs in my own forum, since I feel they break the flow of the conversation, I've grown to like the no-sigs in blog comments lately, but that's my personal taste.
Cristián Lávaque http://cristianlavaque.com

tomis

Thanks for the relpy Anguz,

Hopefully we'll see some more control over sigs in the next release :)
~

CouteauSwiss

Can't wait  :P

members keep puting Huuge horribe signz   >:(

nico77

How can I remove the ability to put BBC in signatures but keep it in posts? Is there an option to do this or am I missing it?

Many thanks..

IKShadow

Any update for 1.1 as it does not have ".signature img" in style.css
Installed:
SMF 1.1
Gender On Registration 1.0
cbi, 0.5
Spoiler Tag
Reg Bar   1.0
Simple Blog 1.4.1

quicksilver1024


wyvern15

Sorry to drag up an old thread.  Is there any progress in the last 7 months regarding the issue of disabling images in signatures..?!

redone

Yes there has been progress. I would expect some kind of additional controls for signatures within future versions of SMF.


wyvern15

Thanks for the speedy reply!

Looking forward to seeing the results of these endeavours.  :D

metallica48423

i don't think you'll be disappointed.

However, for the time being, the code in the first post of this thread will still work for completely removing images from signatures.
Justin O'Leary
Ex-Project Manager
Ex-Lead Support Specialist

QuoteMicrosoft wants us to "Imagine life without walls"...
I say, "If there are no walls, who needs Windows?"


Useful Links:
Online Manual!
How to Help us Help you   
Search
Settings Repair Tool
     

kamalgurung

I am using safmc and smf 1.1.4 and I used the code in style.css and no changes the signatures still appears.

Please kindly help me.

metallica48423

its possible that the signature part uses a different id/class than what the css says to edit here -- have you searched Display.template.php for 'signature' and seen what is on the actual element for the signature?
Justin O'Leary
Ex-Project Manager
Ex-Lead Support Specialist

QuoteMicrosoft wants us to "Imagine life without walls"...
I say, "If there are no walls, who needs Windows?"


Useful Links:
Online Manual!
How to Help us Help you   
Search
Settings Repair Tool
     

Advertisement: