I know a geocacher who doesn't like the "Entry last edited ..." additions to
his logs, and who tried to outsmart gc.com by setting the text color to white
at the end of his log text. (GC will translate the [white] BBcode to the
corresponding HTML <font fgcolor="white"> tag.) Of course, he doesn't close the
tag... guess what happens...
Yes: all subsequent logs are unreadable - until someone else changes the font
color again, and even then the closing tag will restore the white color :(
GeoToad's GPX output, which more or less copies log HTML verbatim, as a
by-product may result in silent parsing errors, effectively dropping all
subsequent cache descriptions in the GPX file. (And you will find out about
that the hard way, when it's too late. gpsbabel is of no help as there's no
problem with XML structure!)
Obviously it's possible to violate almost every HTML standard in GC logs.
To me, the only way to reduce the influence of such junk is, to reduce the
presence of HTML tags in GeoToad output, in particular those present in logs.
<font> tags (triggered by [color], [code] or [size]) in logs are mostly used
for "pretty" enhancements of the users' signatures, and for the nonsense
described above.
While I see the importance of switching text sizes, colors, and styles in cache
descriptions (even if most GPSrs don't know how to display them), I don't see
the point of doing that in a log text. (If you have to be creative, do so in
the log book.)
As a consequence, to make GeoToad more stable, I'm asking for removal of <font>
and </font> tags.
(There are more tags which may have the same effect - so the list may have to
be enhanced later.)
Opinions?
Original issue reported on code.google.com by Steve8x8 on 26 Feb 2012 at 5:27
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
Steve8x8
on 26 Feb 2012 at 5:27