Yes, although I loathe being confronted with signature-images in forum discussions (there is a reason why I posted this: http://xenforo.com/community/thread...ity-the-use-of-images-in-your-signatures.792/) there are in fact also benefits to be considered. For instance: I use the signatures as a place where paying advertisers can promote their product/services the moment they write an informative reply in a thread.
Works really well on our platform, because 3 parties benefit from this way of working:
A very valuable win-win-win situation. So yes, more sophisticated signature-functionality is indeed welcome in situations like these.
- Our userbase get's valuable information from companies through these informative postings (they are not allowed to advertise themselves inside their postings text: they are allowed to only use the restricted signature-area to do that),
- We get money from those advertisers (keeps the costs of the site down and if you do really well... you can make a profit!),
- The company get's clients through their advertisment.
Posts are merged in date order so the first post in this thread is the first time it was suggested.! ---> Hmmm... I guess the trouble with merging threads is that the 'new' first posting now doesn't have much likes. In fact in this case, it has none.
Posts are merged in date order so the first post in this thread is the first time it was suggested.
Obviously it was overlooked and subsequently the same suggestion was posted again 3 or 4 times, each one attracting likes.
/* limited sigs */
.signature
{
max-height: 105px;
padding: 0px;
overflow:hidden;
overflow-y: hidden !important;
overflow-x: hidden !important;
}
Perfect, thats all i needed until something more robust comes along. Simple as it gets, but got the job done... Thanks...until they get around to fixing up the sig options, there is a way to enforce a sig limit in the meanwhile.
if you paste the following into your EXTRA.css, it will not display anything beyond 105px:
its not a perfect solution, but it works.Code:/* limited sigs */ .message .signature { max-height: 105px; padding: 0px; overflow:auto; overflow-y: hidden !important; overflow-x: hidden !important; }
duplicating that is what I'm basically wanting. The only other thing that messed up signatures in the past, was when it allowed images to be linked in from outside urls (instead of uploading the image to the server), and vb wouldn't check the sizing limits. So some people would try to put in some 800 wide x 800 tall signature image, or any size imaginable.Folks, I am in the process of organising the coding
..snip,,
That already exists by way of usergroup/user permissions.In all the requested adjustments and controls let's not overlook an on/off switch: "Allow signatures? Yes. No."
wouldnt mind an option to display a users sig only once per page.Folks, I am in the process of organising the coding of needed functionality and signature limits is up soon.
Is it a case of duplicating what is in vB?
Or do people have different ideas? Please collate your ideas here so we can not only recreate vB functionality but do it with a fresh outlook.
Thanks.
It can block the editing of signatures...
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.