The case for asciidoc from the asciidoctor folks, quoted liberally from AsciiDoc vs Markdown for purposes of discussion and analysis (i.e. Fair Use):
"The defacto lightweight markup language is Markdown. (At least, that’s what you call it at first). The
main advantage of Markdown lies in its primitive syntax: its manual and cheatsheet are one and the
same. But this advantage is also its greatest weakness.
As soon as authors need something slightly more complex than basic prose (e.g., tables, cross
references, footnotes, embedded YouTube videos, etc.), they find themselves resorting to embedded
HTML or seeking out more feature-rich implementations. Markdown has become a maze of different
implementations, termed “flavors”, which make a universal definition evasive.
The IETF has declared “there is no such thing as "invalid" Markdown.” See This Is Markdown!
Or: Markup and Its Discontents.
Here’s how the story inevitably goes. You start out with Markdown. Then it’s Markdown + X. Then
Markdown + X + Y. And down the rabbit hole you go. What’s worse, X and Y often require you to
sprinkle in HTML, unnecessarily coupling content with presentation and wrecking portability. Your
instinct to choose Markdown is good. There are just better options.
AsciiDoc presents a more sound alternative. The AsciiDoc syntax is more concise than (or at least as
concise as) Markdown. At the same time, AsciiDoc offers power and flexibility without requiring the
use of HTML or “flavors” for essential syntax such as tables, description lists, admonitions (tips, notes,
warnings, etc.) and table of contents.
It’s important to understand that AsciiDoc was initially designed as a plain-text alternative to the
DocBook XML schema. AsciiDoc isn’t stuck in a game of whack-a-mole trying to satisfy publishing
needs like Markdown. Rather, the AsciiDoc syntax was explicitly designed with the needs of publishing
in mind, both print and web. If the need arises, you can make full use of the huge choice of tools
available for a DocBook workflow using Asciidoctor’s DocBook converter. That’s why mapping to an
enterprise documentation format like DocBook remains a key use case for AsciiDoc.
And yet, AsciiDoc is simple enough to stand in as a better flavor of Markdown. But what truly makes
AsciiDoc the right investment is that its syntax was designed to be extended as a core feature. This
extensibility not only means that AsciiDoc has a lot more to offer, with room to grow, it also fulfills the
objective of ensuring your content is maximally reusable."
Alright. Okay. I know what I said before. But there is one other thing. Drum roll, please....
The visitor and use graph on the Admin landing page is useful to me. Some nice presets that cover most everything I'd be interested in. But I do find myself oft times pining for an hourly X-Axis spanning more days, e.g. 72 hour axis scaled in one hour increments.
Damn. This is a slimline the cruft and tech debt announcement and I've now added two feature requests. Mea culpa!
Thanks and keep up the great work!
@crazycells said in Forum Stats CSS Issue:
@Tpk you have very cool stats right here:
would you mind sharing the codes for this appearance ?
@Tpk it would be great if you can share the codes. This looks very cool!
Thank you for the explanation. I will probably use a third-party database (firebase) for payments.
Using firebase, different operations can be done on the client side, without disturbing the main server. I think this is very useful for a smoother user experience.
No built in way, but there is nothing preventing you from writing your plugin to use a config file instead of settings stored in the database.
When your nodebb starts instead of loading your plugin settings from the database you would read it from the file.
I recently wrote a blog post which goes hand in hand with developing NodeBB plugins as of late
nodebb-plugin-cloudstorage, GitHub, NPM
nodebb-plugin-lightgallery, GitHub, NPM
In the post, I talk about my workflow and wonder what other workflows people are using for there NodeBB development. NodeBB definitely presented it's own challenges, different from other Node.js projects I've worked on.
Would to hear about what others are doing.
As the title says, I'm trying to make it so only admins/mods can upload or adjust the cover images for people's profiles. I've looked around the various hooks and what not, but I'm at a loss of how to achieve this.
I was originally thinking I could edit the function of the upload/edit buttons and check if the person has the required permissions; but I cannot seem to find where their functionality is actually defined.