Please specify version and format if asking for help, or apply optional tags above:
Tweego Version: 2.1.1
Story Format: SugarCube v2.33.2
The copy of the bugreport macro that I’ve been using makes use of the bbcode keyword “details”. Is any formal documentation available for this keyword? (My web search was unsuccessful. I’m not at all sure where I got this version of the macro.)
I discovered that the current version of bugreport seems to be using “spoiler” instead, although I think this might be problematic when the “details” text is extensive.
When mentioning third-party macros in a question it helps if you :
include a link to where you sourced the third-party macro from, and/or
include a copy of the third-party macro in your comment, especially if you are using a customised variation of that macro.
…because the people trying to answer your question might not know of the macro you’re asking about.
I will assume you mean a variation of the <<bugreport>> macro that can be download from the Add-ons section of the SugarCube 2.x main web-page, because the documentation of the original doesn’t include a “details” bbcode keyword.
After a quick google search I was also not able to find information about a “details” keyword. Did the site you obtained your variation of the third-party <<bugreport>> macro from mention which forum software or forum software extension their variation was targeting?
Unfortunately, I don’t know where I got the variant of “bugreport” that I’ve been using. It seems to have been embedded in my SugarCube twee code for several years. I was hoping that someone would recognize it from its use of “details”. The variant that’s currently on motoslave has been there since at least November of last year (2019). That is the date of the earliest “standalone” copy of the macro that I can find on my computer. I can’t find a standalone copy of the bugreport macro corresponding to the one I’ve been using. I hadn’t looked closely at the “official” version until now because I had rashly assumed that it was the same as the code I’ve been using.
I’ll be updating my story to use the current version, but I’d really like to find out the provenance of the BBcode keyword “details”.
FWIW, here’s a zip of the javascript portion of the macro that I’ve been using. bugreport.zip (1.5 KB)
This is the first I’ve heard about a [details] BBCode, so I can’t help you there. Though, given the name, I’d assume that it’s related to the <details> element—essentially the native HTML5+ way of doing a spoiler.
The original macro was, chiefly, written a long time ago for BBCode-based forums—e.g., phpBB—hence it’s use of the [spoiler] and [code] BBCode tags as it’s code fencing.
Anyway. I checked and the only difference between the original and the modified version, other than the change in BBCode tag, is an addition text heading in the output. Thus, there’s doesn’t seem to be a reason not to use the official version, especially if the [spoiler]→[details] switch isn’t something useful to you personally.
Spoilers are technically separate from details, even on phpBB, and especially here on this forum.
This is a spoiler:
[spoiler]Bruce Willis was actually a robot the whole time[/spoiler]
These are details:
[details="You have to click here to see the rest"]
These are the details hidden by the `[details]` BBCode.
[/details]
This is a spoiler:
Bruce Willis was actually a robot the whole time
These are details:
You have to click here to see the rest
These are the details hidden by the [details] BBCode.
My point was that they perform the same basic function, to wit: hide a thing until users decide to show it. I never said they were the same thing, hence the use of “essentially”.
Had the <details> element actually existed when forums first started implementing the feature, they likely would have simply used it rather than implementing umpteen variations of spoiler text.
EDIT: This is also aside the fact that some spoiler implementations actually do look like the general interface used by most browsers for <details>. They’re not all done as some form of in-place hidden, shaded, blurred, etc. text.
Neither tag exists by default on phpBB, so I’m unsure where you’re going with that. I’ll grant that, IME, [spoiler] is a fairly common addition though. Also IME, I have yet to see a phpBB forum add a [details] tag, which is why I said it was the first I’d heard about it. Thus, while I don’t doubt that some have, plenty certainly have not—if I were to bet, I’d wager on the latter being more common than the former.
My point was that they perform the same basic function, to wit: hide a thing until users decide to show it. I never said they were the same thing, hence the use of “essentially”.