 sj |
||
|
||
Mudcat Will be Fixed
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: miker Date: 12 Feb 99 - 10:26 AM OK I think I may have fixed the posting problems! There were several problems. One had to do with certain (mostly outside the US) user not being able to copy from Word and past into the browser. I think this one has been fixed for a few days now. (PLEASE correct me if I am wrong.) The other one was a problem with non-members not being able to start a thread. (Membership has its rewards.) I fixed that one this morning. Please let me know if anyone is still having problems. Thanks. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: AndyG Date: 11 Feb 99 - 11:57 AM And then it happened when I submitted the error report! Generating the following text:
(I don't know the ins and outs of this board so I'm HTMLing the text content.
----------------------- First part ------------------------ Error Occurred While Processing Request
ACCEPT_CHARSET
48: SERVER_NAME= #SERVER_NAME#
------------------------ Second Part ----------------------
Error resolving parameter ACCEPT_CHARSET
Cold Fusion was unable to determine the value of the parameter. This problem is very likely due to the fact that either:p You have misspelled the parameter name, or br You have not specified a QUERY attribute for a CFOUTPUT, CFMAIL, or CFTABLE tag.
Date/Time: 02/11/99 11:48:43
Please inform the site administrator that this error has occurred (be sure to include the contents of this page in your message to the administrator). ----------------------- Error Ends ---------------------- AndyG |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: AndyG Date: 11 Feb 99 - 11:48 AM I just inadvertently made a double post to the "Mudcat UK" thread. This happened because when I pressed the "Submit" button I went to an error report similar to the report above from The Shambles 07-Feb-99 - 12:44 PM I hit the back button and re-sumbitted generating the error a second time. I then checked the thread before trying again and found the double-post. Sorry I didn't save the error before leaving the page.
AndyG |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Bri Date: 10 Feb 99 - 02:45 PM Ya, the thread thing still isn't working for me. But it's a diff. error now. it's shorter than the last. good luck to whoever hasta fix this thing. :) |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Philippa Date: 09 Feb 99 - 11:34 AM Can we start new threads? I've tried a couple of times, several hours apart, and got the familiar old error notice. Though I do notice some new threads apppearing from other sources. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Joe Offer Date: 08 Feb 99 - 12:37 PM The 'Cat is running very smoothly this morning, and we can now start new threads again. I see in this thread that the forum is still misinterpreting specal characters. Thanks to Max and Mike and the gang for all the hard work. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Philippa Date: 08 Feb 99 - 09:58 AM I gather from Barbara's message in the help section (fadas)that my previous message isn't absolutely clear. Current postings are coming through okay, but there are a lot of lyrics in the forum archives which looked correct when they first appeared but which have recently mutated. |
|
Subject: RE: New Threads From: miker Date: 08 Feb 99 - 09:57 AM I fixed the "New Thread" problem. Happy 'catting! |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Philippa Date: 08 Feb 99 - 07:39 AM There are lots of problems about lyrics with characters such as Š, ‚,–,„... which were published BEFORE the "fixing"; the letters now appear differently and render the messages nonsensical. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Bri Date: 07 Feb 99 - 08:28 PM I can't post new threads either. I tried yesterday and today. this isn't kewl, i have one to post!! but that's ok. i'm just glad to know it wasn't just my comp of connection. Bri |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: rick fielding Date: 07 Feb 99 - 05:38 PM Damn, damn, damn! Once again I have branded myself with the mark of the terminally insecure. When I was unable to post a new thread, I thought "Well there you go again, trying to compete with the adults"! (those who have embraced computer technology to the point where they do not throw tantrums when something goes wrong) Instead of buying "DOS for Dolts" or "Windows for Wingnuts", I went down to the basement and played the blues! Now I find that even the experienced among us are having trouble getting the threads out. Teach me Bill Gates! I'm sorry about those things I called you. I'm in YOUR hands! |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: The Shambles Date: 07 Feb 99 - 12:44 PM I was wondering why there were so few new threads. When I tried to start one I got the following message, Error Occurred While Processing Request Error Diagnostic Information An error has occurred while processing the expression: Exec ThreadMessageNewThread '#Form.ThreadName#', #Form.MemberID#, '#Form.UserName#', '#Form.Subject#', '#FxedBody#' The error occurred on (or near) line 29 of the template file c:\webserver\mudcat\htdocs\threads.cfm.
25: 26: 27: 28:
Error resolving parameter FXEDBODY
Cold Fusion was unable to determine the value of the parameter. This problem is very likely due to the fact that either:
1.You have misspelled the parameter name, or 2.You have not specified a QUERY attribute for a CFOUTPUT, CFMAIL, or CFTABLE tag.
Date/Time: 02/07/99 12:42:19 Browser: Mozilla/3.01C-VN711-003 (Win95; I) Remote Address: 194.168.120.76 HTTP Referer: http://www.mudcat.org/newmess.cfm Template: c:\webserver\mudcat\htdocs\threads.cfm Query String: Title=&Age=1 |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Barbara Date: 07 Feb 99 - 11:39 AM I really like the way the new 'Cat runs, and I'm grateful for all the wonderful work Max and co. have put in. I have a suggestion for those of you who are torqued about the apostrophes and other glitches: try bribes. Make your donation to Mudcat today! Blessings, Barbara |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Wolfgang Date: 07 Feb 99 - 05:01 AM the loading is incredibly quick right now. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Joe Offer Date: 07 Feb 99 - 01:40 AM Ah, MG, we DID need an overhaul. Mudcat was very reliable the first year, but started to get slow the second. Max had to do something to bring back the reliability. Be assured he and his crew will have it humming along smoothly very soon. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: MG Date: 06 Feb 99 - 09:22 PM "If it's not broke, don't fix it." This is another fine mess you've gotten me into. MG |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Joe Offer Date: 06 Feb 99 - 07:26 PM Yup. that's it. Discrimination. Max is giving preferential treatment to women. I protest. Max, I always thought you were fair and equitable. I have to say I'm really disappointed. What's that you say? Alison can't start threads today, either? Uh, sorry...... -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: catspaw49 Date: 06 Feb 99 - 07:20 PM This could be Joe....I can't start a thread either and I know that Rick Fielding can't after I was giving him so much razzing on the Pedro thing. catspaw |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Joe Offer Date: 06 Feb 99 - 04:58 PM Anybody else having trouble starting a new thread? I click on the "Create new thread" link and enter my thread title. Then, when I try to post my initial message, I get an error message. Darn, it's frustrating! Alison has been starting all kinds of new threads. Why can't I? Is there discrimination here? Has Max fallen prey to the feminine wiles of the fair Alison? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Pete M Date: 04 Feb 99 - 03:15 PM Hi Joe, not really, just spent a lot of time testing software systems. I agree though that the 'Cat should handle smart quotes, and I'm sure Max / Mike are working on it. I've never used SQL server, but if the DBMS defines an alpha field in terms of the normal ascii alpha numeric range, it would throw up when it came across a "smart quote", so you would need to filter input and convert. Mind you, that would normally give a quite different error message, so I don't know what magic Max is performing when he (I assume) inverts the file entries to allow forum search on the "body" of the message. Pete M |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Joe Offer Date: 04 Feb 99 - 01:27 PM Pete, you are a paragon of perceptivity, or something like that. It was the quotation marks that were causing the error when I pasted lyrics into this thread. I pasted the document into Notepad and replaced the apostrophes, and then I could paste it into the 'Cat. Trouble is, I don't want to change the settings on Word. Believe it or not, I do use my computer for purposes other than Mudcat. If my Word apostrophes worked on the old 'Cat, why not on the new 'Cat? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: MMario Date: 04 Feb 99 - 12:34 PM the multiple "kudos" were my fault, Joe. I don't know what happenned; but I do not intend to create any new threads for a while. I don't seem to be having problems posting to current threads... but I was typeing along in the "enter message below" box when *blap!* I was back at the forum home. I refreshed the threads and was shocked. I did report it in the help forum. MMario the confused |
|
Subject: Pasting long messages from word From: Pete M Date: 03 Feb 99 - 11:45 PM Hi all I've been playing around with a hex dump of various word / wordpad combinations and I think I may have a clue as to the cause of the problem. If you recall the SQL error messages were "invalid syntax near .... and in all my examples and the one mentioned by Shambles, the "near" character was either s or t. Now these letters are the most common ones to follow an apostrophe, and looking at the word document, this saves an apostrophe as hex 92 whilst word pad saves it as hex 27. I assume this is something to do with the "smart quotes" option in word. I suspect this may be the problem. I expect Max and Mike have gone home by now, but I've sent an email direct just in case. To help them, could those of you who have had this problem check and see if you have smart quotes on in Word? Pete |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Joe Offer Date: 03 Feb 99 - 08:30 PM How did we end up with three Kudos to Alison threads? I used my "delete" button deleted the one message in the one thread because it was a duplicate of another - but now the thread is still at the top of the menu, with zero messages in it. Alison is certainly worthy of all the praise we can heap on her, but wouldn't it be better in one thread. Is this a glitch in the new 'Cat, or did a human goof. I't still trying to paste lyrics from Word and from Notepad into a reply box, and I keep getting error messages. I e-mailed the Word document to the link on the error message. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: SueH Date: 03 Feb 99 - 07:16 PM I have had the same error as The Shambles, just typing my message directly into the message box. Maybe this message will work. I was trying to start a new thread at the time. Maybe the browser you are using is causing a problem somewhere. I am using IE4. SueH |
|
Subject: Test post of paste from ms word pad From: Pete M Date: 03 Feb 99 - 03:47 PM Hi Mike, Unfortunately I didn't save the MS word doc which caused the problem when I shut down last night and didn't get your message until this morning. I tried copying the original back from the thread and posting that but as you will have seen above, that worked OK. I will try creating a new document of about the same length and containing the same type fonts etc and see what that does. To other 'Catters please excuse the non sequiter that this will create, I'm afraid I'm not so dedicated as to write over a page on nothing off the top of my head, so I'll copy in another document. Mike I'll make sure I save this just in case the test works ie it fails to post, repeat the procedure I used last time and try and do a compare and a hex dump on the two clipboard contents. Of course if it fails, the text posts, I suppose we will have to put it down to gremlins.
Perhaps that's worth mentioning though, Test post unrelated to anything else follows. Use of Radar How it works RADAR is an acronym for RAdio Direction And Ranging. Radar sets operate by sending out a focused beam of radio waves, and capturing any signals reflected back to the set. The quality of the signal reflected will depend on the: Size, The bigger something is, the easier it is to see at a given distance Composition Something that reflects well, will be easier to see Orientation, Something square on to the observer is easier to see than something angled away, Texture A rough surface scatters light and radio signals whilst a smooth surface gives a good echo - ever seen a mirror with a rough surface? Shape A curved surface, or one which is at an angle to the beam, will reflect the beam away from the receiver. Uses 1. Ranging Radar uses the time taken for the return signal to be received to calculate the distance of the target, and since the speed of radio waves is precisely known, radar ranges are very accurate. 2. Direction finding If you illuminate something, it is a fundamental law of physics that you cannot see anything smaller than the wavelength of the illuminating beam. Although there are still some sets around which operate in the metre wavelengths, most sets we are likely to come across operate in the centimetre band so definition is quite good. However there are a whole series of problems which degrade the signal to the extent that Radar bearings are nowhere near as accurate as ranges. Display As far as the radar set is concerned, it is the centre of the universe, and the screen reflects this by having the set (and the vessel it is mounted on) at the centre. Any echoes received are shown as a blob on the screen, the size and shape of the blob being determined by the factors noted above rather than the reality of the target. The only information that we can deduce about a target from the radar screen is 1 It probably exists. 2 It's distance from us when the echo was received 3 Its bearing relative to the object on which the set is mounted. These can be interpreted as follows: 1. Existence. If an echo is present for several sweeps, it is reasonable to presume that something solid is out there. What we cannot deduce is anything about its size or composition. We have been reminded recently that sails are not good reflectors of radio waves, and a 40,000 ton vessel will have a bigger echo than a yacht, but a 6000 ton destroyer may not! 2. Distance. This is obtained by moving the cursor or range ring to intersect the echo. It is very accurate, but only true for the time of that sweep!! 3. Bearing. This is also obtained by moving the cursor to intersect the target, is again only true for the time of the sweep, and it is relative to the transmitting vessel!!! Interpretation of display The first thing to remember is that radar is a decision making aid, and that the information it provides should be interpreted in conjunction with all other aids available to you, including the eyeball Mk1 and charts. A radar display, can only show you what has happened, a radar plot enables you to make an informed judgement about what will happen. Range It is impossible to tell from looking at a radar display whether a target shown is one cable or ten miles distant. If someone has changed the range setting since you looked at the set last, it is possible that the display will present the same picture, and a potentially dangerous situation be missed until it is too late. So, check the range setting before you do anything else! A quick rule of thumb, is that an echo which remains on a constant bearing is on a collision course. This is fine for single, slow moving targets, at long range, but if any of these conditions are not met, a more rigorous approach to interpreting the data is required. Also, the converse, that an echo which does not remain on a constant bearing is not on a collision course is not true. Plotting the tracks of the targets. Relative bearings It is essential to remember that ranges and bearings are relative. So the first thing which must be done is to establish your own vessels position and track. To plot the position of the echo: Establish your current position. (It is normal good practice to maintain a plot of the ships course, with fixes every 20 minutes, so at the very worst it will be possible to extrapolate your current track by the distance run since the last fix. Of course a new fix would be better.) Establish your heading. This can be either derived from the track by plotting tidal influence, or converted from the compass bearing to true. Plot the echoes bearing, relative to your heading. Strike an arc at the range of the echo to intersect the bearing. Example. You are heading 094o T and the radar bearing of the echo is 054o R The true bearing of the echo is 094o + 054o = 148o T. Plot all echo's of interest for that position. Repeat plot a suitable time later. Remembering to plot from your new position. For each echo, connect the points plotted and read off course and speed. Use this information to extrapolate the echo's, and your, future positions, and determine if any danger exists. Remember to use ALL information available to you. Example You have three echoes on your screen. position 1 at 0230 position 2 at 0245 Echo1 bears 083o R 3 miles bears 083o R 2.3 miles Echo2 bears 330o R 5 cables bears 290o R 6 cables Echo3 bears 315o R 2.2 miles bears 345o R 1.8 miles Your speed is 6 knots In the absence of any other information, what action, if any would you take? |
|
Subject: Forum search error From: Pete M Date: 03 Feb 99 - 03:41 PM Hi Mike, Error found when using forum search. The search returned a list of hits, I selected one of these which was displayed correctly, but the following error message was appended to the bottom. Error Occurred While Processing Request Error Diagnostic Information An error has occurred while processing the expression: REPLACE(getdetaildata.Name,' ','%20','ALL') The error occurred on (or near) line 83 of the template file c:\webserver\mudcat\htdocs\Detail.CFM.
80: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Error resolving parameter GETDETAILDATA.NAME The column NAME is not present in the query named GETDETAILDATA. It is likely that you have misspelled the name of the column.
Date/Time: 02/03/99 15:36:14 Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows 95) Remote Address: 202.49.158.185 HTTP Referer: http://www.mudcat.org/Results.CFM Template: c:\webserver\mudcat\htdocs\Detail.CFM Query String: messages__Message_ID=55655 Pete M
|
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Liam's Brother Date: 03 Feb 99 - 03:10 PM Thank you, Max.
All the best, |
|
Subject: test - paste from ms word From: Pete M Date: 03 Feb 99 - 02:50 PM If this posts OK please ignore it, it is a duplicate from the "Original music that sounds traditional" thread posted as a test for Mike. Hi Shambles me old mucker, now that's a cunning way to start of version 967 of the "what is folk" thread! ;-) Actually I've tried to take my time before contributing as it is clearly a subject which deserves a thoughtful response, and as usual if I wait most of the things I would have liked to have said have been said already. So, rather than opting for a "me too" I'll try and address each of your original questions in turn; always bearing in mind that phrases like "a good thing" have never been the same since Sellars and Yeatman! 1 Is it a good thing that songs can be written in a style that could be mistaken for a traditional song? I think that this is not only good, it is essential and inevitable. Inevitable because we create within a frame of reference which includes the "traditional" music of western culture, so that will influence the outcome - now the degree to which this is obvious will vary tremendously but it will be there. It is also essential if the folk tradition and here I would define the folk tradition as being something of, by and for the people ie excluding anything written for an audience, or personal aggrandisement; is to continue. "Traditional" folk music, like most things which are currently unfashionable (eg hierarchical management structures) have survived for thousands of years because they work within the situations for which they were created or from which they evolved. 2 Is it a good idea for new writers to consciously try and write songs in this style? Probably the hardest to answer as it "all depends". For people like MacColl and Tawney, it works, and it is hard to imagine them writing in ant other style, for others it doesn't work, and for still others it should not even be considered. I think if you are steeped in the tradition within which you are writing and the subject matter, your natural style of writing and your tune fit, then there is a good chance of it working. 3 Is it the only way that some people will actually be prepared to listen to original material? I think you had your tongue firmly in cheek with that one mate! I'm sure, as I suspect you are, that the only people most to get steamed up over current songs written in traditional style are those who have a narrow definition of "traditional folk" which includes "more than x years old", and who think that nothing else is worthwhile. I don't think any of us including the curmudgeonly twins (Bill D and me (hope you don't mind Bill)) dislike new songs in any style (except for new age !@#$ navel gazers) We might get excited if someone tries to pass them of as traditional, but we would welcome songs which, if they stand the test of time, will become a valid and necessary contribution to the continuance of the corpus of "traditional" songs. 4 If the original songs in this style can be so easily mistaken for the "real thing" does this not make some of the purist's views somewhat invalid, in a musical sense if not a scholarly one? Nah! Firstly I don't believe there is such thing as "purist" category into which we can all be fitted or we wouldn't be having this conversation. Fortunately or unfortunately, we humans love taxonomical quibbling and there is constant changes in what is "in" or "out" of classifications in all fields. Also I think you, and the "if it sounds like a duck" argument are missing the point of this particular category. To stretch the analogy, a duck may answer a duck call, in other words the hunter sounds like a duck to a duck, but he doesn't pass the Turing test, a duck can't get meaningful responses from him. Similarly a song may be identical to a "traditional" song in subject matter, style, music and the use of language, but that is not the only criteria which is relevant. To me it is like eating with a peg on your nose, its Ok and fills you up, but there is not the same enjoyment. Again, I would stress there is no implication that the new song is of any less worth, just that it is not (yet) "traditional". I think that at the root there may be a confusion that "traditional" implies static. Clearly, folk music has and is growing and evolving, some songs which could now be considered "traditional" were not written when Sharp was collecting and some which were sung and popular then have been quietly forgotten as not belonging in "our" bucket. Oh well, time for a work break. Lets try out Mike's changes and see if this posts OK Pete M
|
|
Subject: To Pete M From: miker Date: 03 Feb 99 - 09:24 AM Pete M,
Could you email the offending word doc to mud-error@mudcat.org? This would help tremendously b/c I cannot reproduce the error here.
Thanks a bunch, |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Big Mick Date: 02 Feb 99 - 11:24 PM Hi guys, I have noticed that two posts show on my "Messages since last visit" screen without a topic. Hence you cannot access them. I would think someone just forgot, but one was Dick Greenhaus and the other was Ferrara. Neither are likely to commit this error, and in such a short period. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Pete M Date: 02 Feb 99 - 08:46 PM Mike Curiouser and curiouser, I tried copying the message to word pad, re-copying to the clipboard and then pasting to the message input and this posted OK. It looks as if it may be MS Word putting some non printable characters in somewhere. Do you have the db field defined as alpha, string or what? and does this exclude non standard ascii? Pete M |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Pete M Date: 02 Feb 99 - 08:40 PM Hi Mike still getting problems when inserting long messages. Error message follows: Error Diagnostic Information ODBC Error Code = 37000 (Syntax error or access violation) [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Line 2: Incorrect syntax near 's'.
Date/Time: 02/02/99 20:23:33 Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows 95) Remote Address: 202.49.158.185 HTTP Referer: http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=8934&messages=29 Template: c:\webserver\mudcat\htdocs\threads.cfm Query String: Title=&Age=1 Unfortunately the error message doesn't reproduce the invalid command syntax. I tried twice mindful of Shambles previous comment. the "..error near" letter changed. Hope this helps. Pete M |
|
Subject: From is null From: Miker R Date: 02 Feb 99 - 03:57 PM I fixed the problem "appeared to be anonymous even though I put my name in the "From:" box." -Mike |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Date: 02 Feb 99 - 03:30 PM My last message "Apparently the new mudcat handles characters ......" appeared to be anonymous even though I put my name in the "From:" box. Let's see if it neglects my name in the "From:" box of this message. In case it's relevant, I'm using an old version (3.01) of Netscape. I didn't have disappearing name problems before the new Mudcat. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Date: 02 Feb 99 - 03:21 PM Apparently the new mudcat handles characters with codes greater than 127 different than the old. probably some sort of smart quotes. In particular in some messages the quotes ` and ' are rendered as characters 0xBE and 0xAE respectively. Could you run all the messages through a filter to translate these characters? I assume very few messages actually wanted those extended characters which seem to be the upper and lower case versions of the (dipthong?) ae. No doubt there are other problem characters also. |
|
Subject: To Shambles From: miker Date: 02 Feb 99 - 02:38 PM The Shambles,
Could you email the Word document in question to mud-error@mudcat.org? That way I can reproduce the error here. Thanks -Mike |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: AllisonA(Animaterra) Date: 02 Feb 99 - 12:53 PM When I was on my Mac (G3) at work yesterday I tried to create a thread and got the same results as Shambles; so it doesn't have anything to do with Word as far as I can tell. I just typed it directly onto the space provided. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: The Shambles Date: 02 Feb 99 - 12:48 PM Mike I did try to post it here (as pasted from Word)but it gave the error message above. I have also E Mailed it to you. All I tried was to put the cursor in the box and paste, as usual? But if I paste it to Word Pad first and then to here it works? |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Date: 02 Feb 99 - 11:32 AM Mike (and in response to long messages getting cut off): How are you passing text into the database? I never tried passing a string into a text (ie memo) field. Maybe that's the problem. As for the slanted apostrophe be converted to AE, that's probably a bug in the sql server, don't ya think? -Brian (one of the other Onstage/Mudcat helpers) the rest is a test............................................................1..........................2.......................................3..................................................4........................................................5..................................................................6.....................................................7........................................................8..........................................9 |
|
Subject: Posting Problem From: miker Date: 02 Feb 99 - 11:20 AM I doubt very much that it is a "Word Problem". Could you please try to repost you word message in this thread? Please carefully note how you fill out each fields. Thanks. Mike |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: The Shambles Date: 02 Feb 99 - 09:18 AM It would appear to be Word that is the problem, for when I pasted from Word to Word Pad and then posted it worked? Please Advise. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: The Shambles Date: 02 Feb 99 - 09:04 AM This is what I get when I try to post longer messages (made up with Word).
Error Occurred While Processing Request Error Diagnostic Information ODBC Error Code = 37000 (Syntax error or access violation) [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver][SQL Server]Line 2: Incorrect syntax near 't'. Date/Time: 02/02/99 09:02:44 Browser: Mozilla/3.01C-VN711-003 (Win95; I) Remote Address: 194.168.67.132 HTTP Referer: http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=8934&messages=25 Template: c:\webserver\mudcat\htdocs\threads.cfm Query String: Title=&Age=1 |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Date: 02 Feb 99 - 08:47 AM Second test with client-side data:
Browser: MSIE Version 4.72.31.10.8
AndyG
|
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Date: 02 Feb 99 - 08:38 AM Just testing as my last two posts have lost the From: entry
AndyG |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: The Shambles Date: 02 Feb 99 - 07:11 AM I couldn't post it as a new thread either? |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: The Shambles Date: 02 Feb 99 - 07:05 AM I too am having a problem in posting a longish message in the reply box. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Roger in Baltimore Date: 02 Feb 99 - 05:58 AM Joe, I posted a long reply in the "moving" thread. I copied it from a Word Perfect 7.1 document without problem. I, too, get the AE combination for some apostrophes, even in one message from you, Joe. Roger in Baltimore |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Date: 02 Feb 99 - 03:53 AM I've just sent an anonymous post to the 'Goodnight Irene' thread. I'll try again. In case this is anonymous as well, would someone let me know why what I write in the 'From:' box gets erased in posting? I'd hate staying anonymous although I still cannot subscribe to the Mudcat. Thanks, Susanne (skw@worldmusic.de) |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Will be Fixed From: Big Mick Date: 02 Feb 99 - 12:08 AM Love it, seems quicker and I am having none of the problems listed above. Anything I can do to help with the fundraising? And Max how about trying to work out an agreement with Elderly? I mentioned this in an earlier thread. I would be happy to make the approach, if you would like. They get a lot of play here. All the best, Mick Lane |
| Share Thread: |