Blue font



  • The user couldn't figure out why her font was blue.  Here's the snippet of her HTML:

     
    <font face="Verdana" size="2" color="#0C6BBA">
    <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="1" color="#0C6BBA">
    <font face="Verdana" size="2" color="#0C6BBA">
    <font face="Verdana" size="2" color="#0C6BBA">
    <font face="Verdana" size="2" color="#0C6BBA">
    <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="1" color="#0C6BBA">

    her text here 

     

     



  • I'll bet the rest of her myspace profile was even worse



  • Well don't leave us hanging here, tell us what the source of the problem was. I'm with the user on this one, this must be some obscure bug.



  • @ailivac said:

    I'll bet the rest of her myspace profile was even worse

    Awesome response! :) 



  • Looks like somebody used a really crappy WYSIWYG HTML editor.



  • Not just blue... really, really, really, really, really blue.

     



  • @merreborn said:

    Looks like somebody used a really crappy WYSIWYG HTML editor.

     

    Ding! Ding! Ding!  We have the winner.

    MS FrontPage

     

     



  • @Wayne said:

    @merreborn said:
    Looks like somebody used a really crappy WYSIWYG HTML editor.

    Ding! Ding! Ding!  We have the winner.

    MS FrontPage

     And people wonder why I stubbornly refuse to use anything but a text editor to hand code HTML.

     If I want to be fancy with it, I'll use a text editor that colours my tags and code, just for clarity.  The minute it starts trying to assume what I'm typing in and auto-filling it, I get cranky and toss it.

     Seejay



  • "The pen is blue, the pen is blue, the goddamn pen is blue!"



  • shudder

    We have a delightful little module in our authoring program that takes Rich Text and "converts" it into html. For example, here's the first thing I found:

    [code] <!-- _ -->

    arteriosclerosis.

    [/code]

    Our excuse is that this is from ~1998, back when the web was new, and shiny, and crap like this was tolerated. Sadly, even if we got rid of the componant and rewrote it, we still have to deal with all the legacy stuff just like this in the database, and reparsing it to remove the cruft is sadly not allowed for various (actually somewhat good) reasons.

    Trust me when I say It Could Be Worse



  • I'm afraid to ask why it thinks an underscore would be a useful comment.



  • CTRL + F

    "blue"

    No matches found.

     
    See I told you!  WTF?!
     



  • Reminds me of a RTF/DOC to HTML Converter I once tested.



    If you had something like test, it transformed it to <b>t</b><b>e</b><b>s</b><b>t</b>.
     



  • @mdk said:

    If you had something like test, it transformed it to <b>t</b><b>e</b><b>s</b><b>t</b>.

    lol fgetc() and byte-oriented parsers, lol



  • Any chance she lives in Happy Happy Valley, and her last name is Carpainter?



  • @mattwho said:

    "The pen is blue, the pen is blue, the goddamn pen is blue!"

    This just gave me a brilliant idea. An all new software package on a CD for $19.95 at your local <name_of_useless_idiotware_outlet/> called "Website Trimmer Fantasic!(tm)"

    What it does is reads in a WYSIWYG page/site and converts it to a list of human readable instructions so that the author can follow the instructions and see how soon they get bored with following them.

    eg.

    Pick up the blue pen.

    Pick up the blue pen and get ready to write in big letters.

    Pick up the blue pen. 

    (etc)

    They follow each instruction carefully, enter the time it took them to get really bored into the special "Optimized Method Factor Grading(tm)" tool, hand optimize the code and run it through the tool again. Each time they have follow the new instructions and enter the time it took before they get really bored, they get a new Optimized Method Factor Grading(tm).

    Once they get a suitably high Optimized Method Factor Grading(tm), say in the order of 368 billion, their web site is ready to publish without any further checking. Website Trimmer Fantasic!(tm) would then search their computer and their hosting server for copies of the original version and overwrite them with the optimized one! Without even need the user to press a "Yes, I'm sure" button!!!

    This would have the double advantage of reducing the size of a whole raft of WYSIWYG sites to a few hundred bites that gets rendered as unintelligible guff, reducing the bandwidth wasted on them and making them easier to spot PLUS making a crap load of cash off suckers.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.