User talk:Aichon

Aichon:Talk

• Main
• Characters
• Sandbox

• Talk
• Userscripts
• Other

Aichon

ˈīˌkän :Talk

Announcement: I'm no longer active. My talk page is still your best bet to get in touch. —Aichon— 04:39, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Please be aware of the following guidelines before posting here.

• New conversations should be started at the bottom using a level two header (e.g. ==Header==).
• I like to keep conversations wherever they start, but if a conversation ends up here, I will keep it here.
• I will format comments for stylistic reasons, delete comments for whatever reason, and generally do anything else within reason.

Thanks. —Aichon—

Archives: 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | To do

Userscripts

I've been looking very carefully at all your GMscripts! They're really cool ones :) I'm a big fan of scripts and extensions. I think I've got ALL of them, really. I should show you some really old and kludged possession of mine. I tried to make some old stuff work for me but the results are really quick and dirty. I tried to use UD building state colorizer but that one doesn't work at all. Also Barrista does not works well. Bars are empty and my name is null. I can exit undefined :/

Something I find strange is the barricade option! I thought that for security, when you click the button the server generates a random link barricade# with # a number. Then how can your extension know the actual number before you click? Cool thing. --DiSm ~ T 12:43, 16 August 2010 (BST)

Which browser are you using? Some browsers don't support all of the features available, and I haven't had a chance yet to see how the recent game updates might have broken the userscripts either, which might explain a few more issues you're having. For instance, with Barrista, the issues you describe make me think you're using Firefox, and that's a known issue, which is why I say in the description for Barrista that it doesn't work with Firefox. It's probably possible to make it work, but I haven't had the time nor the inclination to sit down and spend the hours figuring it out since I don't use Firefox myself (I still plan to...one day...). As for Building State Colorizer not working, that's news to me, so I'd like to look into it some more. Again, if you can tell me what browser you're using, I'd like to know, since that script should be working across all of the supported browsers (i.e. pretty much anything but IE).

Regarding the barricade link, you're right, he does generate a random number for the barricade button to use, so you can't just punch it into your address bar and hit it a lot. Instead, what my userscript does is find the barricade button that's on the page, extract the "action" field from the button (the action field contains the random number), and then use that as the action field for my button. Basically, you could say that I take the action from the actual barricade button and put it in mine instead, which is why I also delete the barricade button from the page in order to clean things up. —Aichon— 23:04, 16 August 2010 (BST)

Actually, scratch that about known issues with Barrista. The game update broke it further, so it's not even working for me. Ditto for UDBSC...the game update broke it as well. I'll have to look into what changed... —Aichon— 00:13, 17 August 2010 (BST)

Turns out the game didn't actually break UDBSC, but a broken Barrista caused it to not function properly. Anyway, I've fixed Barrista for the recent game update (turns out Kevan changed the code of the page), added support for Firefox (turns out the fix was simpler than expected), and fixed a few other errors I had (I was wondering why every Mall I checked didn't have a Gun Store...now I know!). Anyway, give 'em a download and install and see how they work for you now. —Aichon— 01:04, 17 August 2010 (BST)

Hey Aichon. Been testing various scripts recently (a friend of mine needed me to find some for her), anyhow I tested Barrista on Chrome and found some problems (tested the newest release).

The HP and AP bars do not work (there is nothing in them), the XP display does not list any value, the action buttons (exit building and search in my case) overlap the suburb name, and the character name is null. Also of interest is that the old character box has not disappeared as it does in Firefox.

One thing I'm unsure of is the greying out of the settings tab when clicking skills and contacts, making it impossible to navigate directly back there, you have to go via the city view (occurs in both Firefox and Chrome although in Chrome navigating to settings will take you to null anyway).

By the way, I was wondering if you could explain to me why you chose zoom out as your refresh button over map.cgi?

I hope this is of use to you. And thanks for the Survivor Aggregator, that's my favorite. :) - User:Whitehouse 02:48, 17 August 2010 (BST)

Well, dang, right you are, it is broken in Chrome again. I'll look into it later tonight and see if I can find a fix for it. I have no idea why it's doing that, since Chrome and Safari are built on the same rendering engine, and it looks perfect in Safari.

As for Settings, it is grayed out on those pages because I need to find your character ID on a page in order to make the link to Settings (technically, Greasemonkey in Firefox could get around that issue, since it has the ability to store information, but I don't make use of Greasemonkey-specific behavior), but your character ID isn't anywhere on those pages. In some of my earliest versions of the script, I outright removed the button, but I found that behavior to be annoying in terms of muscle memory and whatnot, so I simply chose to gray it out instead in later versions.

And I chose ?zoom for a few reasons. One, some of my scripts (e.g. chud) rely on having that list of characters in order to work properly, so having it displayed means that other userscripts can work better as well. Two, in situations where people tend to refresh often, such as strike teams and the like, it's useful to see the complete list of people in the building and who is at what HP. Three, I figure if you're using an IP hit, you might as well get your money's worth and get more information. ;) —Aichon— 05:09, 17 August 2010 (BST)

Okay, I don't have a great explanation for it, but I think the fault might lie with Chrome, not me. Basically, when I first installed my newest version, I had the exact same results you mentioned. Despite modifying the code and making all sorts of other changes, nothing seemed to be working. That is, until I disabled the script in the extensions settings, then reenabled it. It seems like that did the trick, since it immediately started working on its own. I even reverted back to the version of the code that I released earlier today, disabled and reenabled it, and it still works, so I'm guessing it's something odd about the way Chrome is handling these scripts, though I'm not sure what that could be. Anyway, try disabling it and then reenabling it, and let me know how that goes. —Aichon— 07:58, 17 August 2010 (BST)

That works for me too. Everything seems to working. Thanks. :) - User:Whitehouse 16:02, 17 August 2010 (BST)

Hey Aichon, thanks for all your hard work with these scripts. I am using Opera 10.61 and the Building Colorizer was working fine 'til the UD update. I've replaced the script with the most current one (1.3) listed on you userscripts page but no joy. Am I looking in the right place for the most current version? Were you even aware that Opera was having a problem with it as well?? --Dex Ter 02:44, 18 August 2010 (BST)

Yeah, I've been getting a few more reports from various people both on IRC and the wiki that this script in particular is causing issues (I now have reports of issues for Chrome, Safari, and Opera). I'm not sure what the problem is just yet, since in each of the browsers I've tried it with, it gives me issues at first, but then can be made to work with just a little jimmying around with the settings for the userscript (i.e. without changing the code at all). Regardless, I'll be looking into it some more within the next few hours, since you're not the only one reporting issues, but I'm not sure if I'll be able to find a fix to the code, since the code seems to work even without changes if the browsers just want to cooperate. Anyway, I'll see if I can sort out what might be the problem, that way I can either give instructions that work or else can post code that works as expected without any funny business. —Aichon— 03:21, 18 August 2010 (BST)

Okay, try installing the new version, 1.4.1, that I just posted. It should work now. Turns out that it may have only been partially broken (i.e. works sometimes, not others), which is why I was having trouble finding the issue. —Aichon— 10:13, 18 August 2010 (BST)

Unfortunately, still not working for me. I tried removal all other scripts to be sure there was no conflict - no luck. Tried the recommendation to use it with Better Name Colorer - again no luck...  :( --Dex Ter 11:14, 18 August 2010 (BST)--

Afraid I don't know what to tell you. I actually just installed Opera so that I could test this very issue for you, and it worked fine for me immediately (though a few of my other scripts don't seem to work, such as UDMap, chud, and possibly more I haven't realized yet). Although, now that I think of it...you mentioned earlier that you were installing version 1.3, but you should have hopefully been installing v1.4 or later at that point. Just to confirm, you are using v1.4.1 right now, right? —Aichon— 11:44, 18 August 2010 (BST)

Well, that is odd. After your previous note saying you repaired the script and to install V1.4.1 I went back to the scripts page and found the updated header and the install button brought me to V1.4 which I installed, and it didn't work. Now I go there and it gives me V1.4.1! which I've installed and it works. Maybe I didn't refresh the page? No idea... regardless, it is working now, thanks for the help. And, yes, UDMap and chud don't work for me either, and never have, along with many others...  :) --Dex Ter 15:51, 18 August 2010 (BST)--

Yeah, I posted 1.4.1 right before mentioning it here. Prior to that I only had 1.4 posted, which was the partially non-functional one. And I might have to look into those at some point. I wonder why they don't work in Opera... —Aichon— 21:50, 18 August 2010 (BST)

I still haven't tried the new versions of the scripts but everything sounds very good to me :P I'm using Firefox with tons of addons. That's a real problem now. I'm addon-holic. I also use Kameleon sometimes but that's just for fun. When I'm on my phone I use OperaMobile which is a real pain. I'll let you know when I have the chance to test again ;) --DiSm ~ T 16:29, 19 August 2010 (BST)

DS Redesign

Smaller does seem better. I'd probably add a link in the peer reviewed etc. box to the dupe search engine. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 14:10, 17 August 2010 (BST)

Building state bug

The building state Userscript is basically rejecting the new UD on Chrome ("New UD" meaning it since the update for directions to safehouses/Scent trails). I've tried reinstalling it, but it's always grey. Sorry to be a bother, but if you can fix it whenever, it would be great :D Shadok ^{T Balance is power} 14:02, 17 August 2010 (BST)

Check a few headers up. The issue has already been addressed. It's a problem with Chrome, not the userscript. Just disable it then reenable it via the Extensions settings in Chrome. If that doesn't work, try uninstalling and reinstalling, then disable/reenable if necessary. I'm not sure exactly why Chrome is buggering it up, but it is. —Aichon— 23:33, 17 August 2010 (BST)

Well, you've fixed it now. New version works fine. Thanks for getting that working. Shadok ^{T Balance is power} 10:14, 18 August 2010 (BST)

Urban Sombrero

Checkuser confirms Celmare as an alt of Urban sombrero. Grounds for a ban on the account or what? I shouldn't think so unless vandalism comes up, but I'd imagine something must be done.--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature2 13:02, 18 August 2010 (BST)

I also have knowledge to indicate that several of the IPs he's used are proxies. Can we ban those IPs, or is vandalism on them necessary first?--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature2 13:06, 18 August 2010 (BST)

I'd suggest bringing it up on A/VB, but we do have a policy regarding proxy use, so even if vandalism hasn't occurred, other steps may be taken potentially. I don't have as much experience with this area as some of the other sysops however, so I'd definitely take it to VB and see where the discussion goes. —Aichon— 13:10, 18 August 2010 (BST)

Huh

I guess I'm not the only one who can't count. There's actually 13 Spam votes total here, not 5. Unless you were only counting the ones with Spam in bold, then yea, there's 5. But then again, this bold spam vote is technically unsigned, as there's no link to a userpage, so technically there's 4. Perhaps you ought to correct your mistake. ;) --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 03:24, 21 August 2010 (BST)

I counted just fine. I was only counting the ones in bold, since that section can have a few different types of votes under it, and they're each governed by a different set of cycling guidelines (i.e. we don't just tally the votes under that section and cycle based on that alone, since dupes and spam votes are cycled differently, otherwise you could make the case that I should have cycled it as a Dupe instead). In this case, we need a minimum of three actual Spam votes before sysops are allowed to exercise their right to clear the suggestion from the system. As for the one invalid signature, you are right, it is invalid, though it makes no material difference. I corrected it, just because you nudged me about it, but, generally speaking, it's more effort than it's worth to make corrections like that, given that it doesn't affect the outcome of the suggestion. —Aichon— 08:50, 21 August 2010 (BST)

Lost Section

Hey,... this isn't in the deletion archives,... how come? -_∞ Poodle of Doom _∞ 03:38, 21 August 2010 (BST)

"whatlinks here" is a beautiful thing (it should have been literally the first thing you did to find out where it was archived) --

 

 

 

 

04:24, 21 August 2010 (BST)

However that would take a modicum of awareness. 05:08, 21 August 2010 (BST)

Save your attacks for when he's self-restraint challenged, not for when he thinks something is broken and speaks up to get it fixed, which would improve the wiki. Good-faith. Don't discourage it. --VVV ^RPMBG 05:59, 21 August 2010 (BST)

Fair enough, you be right. --

 

 

 

 

08:00, 21 August 2010 (BST)

Alternatively, September 18th + 2 weeks = October 2nd, which is the month and day it was archived. —Aichon— 08:54, 21 August 2010 (BST)

Template:Click

Remembered the discussion from a while ago and wondered if anybody actually did update the template. But you'd made others instead. I mean the oldest version was utter crap, mine was workable if limited, and yours was easily better. I would've updated the template :P Anyway, I remember being quite miffed at the time when I made some swanky changes and then you showed up and thoroughly trounced me.

So I decided to try out a possible IE fix on Template:ClickInternal which seems to work. If you agree, can we maybe redirect Click to it now? --  RoosterDragon  01:21, 27 August 2010 (BST)

Heh, well, I hate to break things, and with edge cases the way they are, I wasn't sure that my fix would work for every single thing that the original template worked for, which is why I figured it'd be best to just make new ones. Plus, I needed one for an external link, so it just made sense. And I do apologize for any one-upsmanship I may have engaged in. It wasn't my intention, but I just remember stumbling on that conversation while tired and sick one night and seeing a massive discussion about how it wasn't possible to do some part of it when I knew I had already done something just like it before.

Anyway, since I'm on my Mac, I don't have IE right in front of me at the moment (it'd need a reboot to Win7, but I'm using this computer to cade watch Blackmore at the moment), but from what I can tell, there's a bit of an issue in FF, Chrome, and Safari. If you mouseover the region for about 1000px below an image, you should see that it's actually part of the link now as a result of the recent changes. We'll probably want to clean that up. ;) —Aichon— 01:39, 27 August 2010 (BST)

Annnnd, reverted the font-size and line-height changes for the moment, just so that it doesn't break existing uses of the template. I think you're on the right track though, and something along those lines should be workable, I suspect. It's just going to be a matter of figuring out which combination does the trick. Plus, there's also the question of dealing with the inline-block, since IE7 and lower doesn't respect it, as far as I can recall, though we may be able to get around it since I seem to recall something about tricking IE by using the hasLayout property and "zoom: 1"...gonna have to check into that, I guess.

Also, I've seen a few cases where ClickInternal fails currently anyway, and I can't figure out why. In all of the cases, it was for an image nested a few structural elements deep, but there just must've been something about the positioning that threw off things. Go figure. It's definitely not perfect, even in the browsers it "supports". —Aichon— 01:47, 27 August 2010 (BST)

Don't worry about the one-upmanship, I'm only trying to one-up by fixing it for IE after all. :P

The 1000px below thing is indeed disappointing. But that just makes me think as I did for click and have several em-spaces, so the height lines up. But then you need to spam em-spaces. (Hell, having 20 or more in Click actually wouldn't be that much of a crime)

Maybe this is one of those where you just hope the user puts in correct data so you can futz about less and they can deal with the problems. --  RoosterDragon  02:17, 27 August 2010 (BST)

Ok so I had another bash at it. See sandpit. Whatever magic that works for FF et al that you managed seems to still apply. Whilst IE relies on the em-spam stuff (thus still fails for wide stuff). However the font-sizing agrees with FF now. The only problem is the added feature of the inline. The old template never had it, but having it obviously gives problems for IE7 and older as you said. Since the only real use of inline is sigs, I'm wondering whether to remove it since it basically means broken sigs for older IE, and then forcing anybody using it to replace with image redirects. While it's an edge case, we are talking broken signatures for anybody browsing the site in an outdated IE. Probably not a problem for the regulars but still a big problem for the internet at large.

So anyway assuming the template does actually work, I defer to your opinion on the inline issue. --  RoosterDragon  14:25, 30 August 2010 (BST)

I like it! That actually solves the main problem we had with IE8. That said, as you pointed out, it does come with a few drawbacks, one of which you already noted:

1. IE7 doesn't handle inline-block properly, so images each get their own line, making it unsuitable for signatures.
2. The changes to font-size produced two effects:
   • It adds an image-spanning onmouseover link underline through the middle of the image in Chrome and Safari.
   • In IE7, some images (taller than line-height?) get a good chunk of the bottom cut off, seemingly due to being pushed down by some invisible text.

As I had mentioned before, I had some ideas regarding getting this to not break in IE7, but I hadn't looked into it much. I finally went ahead and looked into it some more today, and what it basically boils down to is that we can use various CSS hacks to specifically target IE7 with certain attributes, making it finally not break there. Coupled with what you came up with for IE8, we can combine these various methods to get something that doesn't break in IE7, and works perfectly in IE8, Firefox, Chrome, and Safari.

To get it to work, I located some inline-block tricks that fool IE7 into allowing us to display it inline and added them into your code. As a nice bonus, they also provide a little extra backwards compatibility with older versions of FF. I was then able to take some of those tricks, which relied somewhat on CSS hacks, and was able to produce some other CSS that specifically targets IE6 and 7 (by putting "*" before the attribute's name) or IE6, 7, and 8 (by putting "\9" after the end of the attribute itself). By using those, I could then make CSS that would apply one attribute to FF/Saf/Chr and another to the various IE versions.

Anyway, long story short, thanks to what you figured out, it all works now. Check out the final result of your efforts and mine here, and if you want to see it put up against a test suite, you can check here. Near as I can tell, it now works flawlessly in IE8, Chrome, Safari, and Firefox with no drawbacks, and has no drawbacks in IE7, though it adds nothing either. I haven't tested IE6, but IE6 is only used by something like 4% of the world now, so I'm not gonna sweat over it, and the IE7 changes I made should have only helped the IE6 situation anyway. I think we finally have a finished solution with no major compromises. If you agree, and find nothing that I messed up when working with your code, I think we're good to go. —Aichon— 01:20, 31 August 2010 (BST)

You sir are a god among men. Hell it even works for sigs now, top stuff. So I'm gonna paste over the template and see if I can't get people to update their sigs and stuff. Again, nice work. --  RoosterDragon  06:56, 1 September 2010 (BST)

As I said elsewhere, you did all the hard work. I just tweaked a few things that I copied from elsewhere. Here's hoping they don't break when IE9 arrives. >_> —Aichon— 07:41, 1 September 2010 (BST)

Apparently IE9 will actually have decent CSS3 support and a 97 Acid3 score and non-buggy CSS2. Well that's what the interwebs seem to suggest from the preview anyway. Bout time too. --  RoosterDragon  08:47, 1 September 2010 (BST)

Ehhh...I'll believe it when I see it. Plus, I'm actually more worried about those hacks. Assuming Microsoft fixes the parser bugs that let those hacks work in previous IE versions, and assuming they actually support CSS3 decently, we'll be fine, but if they suddenly support CSS3 better and they don't fix the parser bugs, we might have IE9 displaying only half of the image, possibly. —Aichon— 08:50, 1 September 2010 (BST)

thankx

Thanks for the fix on the community announcements template... It's one of those things where you see the fixed version and wonder why you didn't think of doing that in the first place :/ -- LEMON #1 11:07, 27 August 2010 (BST)

Well, I had seen that problem from day 1, but I was both too timid and too tired to mess around with it then since some of this inclusion stuff makes me pause for a minute. Right now, this Blackmore stuff has me ramped up a bit, and I'm too tired to worry about consequences. Thankfully, it worked out okay. I did FA as well, though it'll likely be less useful than the CP change due to the nature of the page. —Aichon— 11:13, 27 August 2010 (BST)

userscripts

How hard/possible it would be to make a "last seen" greasemonkey userscript where if you look at a profile in UD it has a small note somewhere on the page of "where last seen" (with location and date), the information of which would be submitted by users who had the same script, onto some sort of server? Ignoring the moral issues, of course. -- LEMON #1 12:44, 30 August 2010 (BST)

Rev's IRC Profilebot has a feature like this, though I think it's keyed into the 'last seen' feature of the RG rather than anything else. 13:49, 30 August 2010 (BST)

You're basically asking how hard it would be to make DEMON, which would involve cobbling together a database server that you're hosting on your own which would collect all of the data that the users were passing to it. As for the script side of things itself, I'm not actually too sure. It's beyond what I've ever done, I'm afraid, since I've never worked with having asynchronous communication between the scripts and some other source. I want to say it's possible using userscripts, at least in Firefox, but I can't honestly say since I'm not entirely sure what the security restrictions are on that type of communication. I do know it should be possible to do it if you write an extension for Firefox, but something like that is beyond what I've done before, so it'd take me awhile to get up to speed on how all of that works if I were to do it (i.e. I'm not accepting the job). Long story short, probably possible, but you'd likely want someone with extension writing experience, as well as someone with database and PHP/ASP experience. It'd take more work than what any of my scripts took. —Aichon— 22:20, 30 August 2010 (BST)

Cool, thanks. -- LEMON #1 00:36, 31 August 2010 (BST)

Calling it...

This will end well. --Thadeous Oakley 00:07, 1 September 2010 (BST)

Jorm gets in to edit conflicts now and again, but he generally backs down if you can provide good evidence for your case. It shouldn't be a major problem.--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature2 00:13, 1 September 2010 (BST)

It'll end up being jorm vs. Rev if it does continue since I'll back off before taking it to arbies. It's not worth it for me, given that I want to see that entire page redesigned anyway. I've found that attempting to predict jorm rarely turns out as I expected in the end, however. —Aichon— 06:14, 1 September 2010 (BST)