We do validate the quotes (kinda), and attach a .quote-modified class to any which have been amended. Let’s see if it figures out the nested quotes:
Hmmm, no it doesn’t. I guess ‘technically’ that content is still part of @ryanerwin’s post. Quite tricky to resolve though. As @zogstrip already said the best way is to try and get your users to quote the original post.
They do quote correctly most of the time. For casual users, nested quotes can be pretty complicated… The “Quote whole post” button is very rarely used for us.
It’s just the real example that came up today, where an innocent but not extremely sophisticated user was just trying to make a quote, and the quote appeared as though it was from a different user…
That’s why I posted it here.
Mods can of course manually edit the post to fix it. And this can’t come up too terribly often. Just a thought to avoid an awkward situation that comes up occasionally
Here’s the actual post (names removed).
You can see how that being attributed to the opposite party in a debate comes across as pretty strange.
NOTE: feel free to delete the image in this post if it’s over the line for meta TOS… Just thought it best to provide a real example.
@eviltrout si no es increíblemente complejo y/o doloroso de arreglar, no me importaría que alguien se hiciera cargo de esto… sin embargo, si sí es muy complejo, entonces déjalo.
Por lo que recuerdo, la última vez que investigué un problema similar (la coincidencia de etiquetas anidadas en extractos en JavaScript) me quedé atascado porque necesitaba expresiones regulares con retroceso. Aunque, por otro lado, no me sorprendería si alguien más hábil con las expresiones regulares que yo pudiera encontrar una solución aceptable.
Esto ya se ha implementado y funciona como se esperaba. Citar una cita conservará la información del mensaje original. Pruébalo con una de las citas anteriores.
parece funcionar, ya que lo tomé de aquí: