opentype

This bug still exists.

It is, but I am not sure what kind of reaction you expect from this topic. It already has been discussed many times before.

There is no stock option to change this.

Yes. There is a “Author in Record View” switch in the plugin settings. You are also free to customize the templates however you like, but doing that will be up to you or the devs you work with. I cannot provide customization instructions.

Well, that would be a problem in your theme. The different CSS files are merged automatically. When there is a problem in one file, for example the custom.css, the plugin CSS files might not work. With ACP access I could check if I quickly spot a problem. But ultimately, the screenshots prove that it works in general, so theme problems would have to be solved by you or your theme designer.

I don’t understand the questions. SuperDocs is a set of Pages templates. That’s independent from any themes.

No. My answer still stands. Pay attention to this sentence from support: This is exactly what is happening. So please continue with the ticket. I know this error. I know it is not caused by my plugin. The error is in a ACP database query. SuperBlocks does not contain database queries.

If upgrading and patching doesn’t fix it, you have to open a support ticket with IPS. That has nothing to do with SuperBlocks.

That’s an IPS error. Make sure you run the latest IPS release including the latest patches available when running the support tool in the ACP.

It will appear for every record who has a link set through that field. The ordering of Pages fields happens through drag-and-drop on the field overview page of the Pages database in the ACP.

I don’t know what to tell you. The PDF explains in which field you need to put the customization. The first post says it as well: It needs to be an URL field and the code goes into the “display field settings”. That’s it. There is nothing else to do to “make it work”.

You need to temporarily turn this on to get to the settings:

Every Pages database needs to be placed on a page. But you are not supposed to place the SuperList block on the same page. Just put it on a different page, like your homepage, or forum page or wherever you like. That’s a setting in the SuperList plugin settings.

The point of the plugin is to be used for ANY kind of list, as my demo page shows. A member benefit list and a YouTube video list are completely different. That’s why there is no “complete code” or anything as you ask for. That’s impossible. It’s meant to be used for whatever fields you want to set up. So that’s a part you need to do for yourself. I even went so far as to give the example code as used on my demo site so anyone who likes this display can replicate it. That’s all explained in the instructions PDF.

There is no “whole code”. Every line in the demo is it’s own field, and which fields you create is totally up to you. Looking at your link, you have the basic setup done. Now you need to create the custom fields you want to show.

The first post of this support ticket has some code samples: https://invisioncommunity.com/forums/topic/440852-pages-superlist-support-topic/

That’s because Facebook will not crawl the page instantly. If you share the link for the first time, you might not see the picture instantly. But it will get added. That’s just how Facebook works. There is.

That link will be shown with an image. I tested it. But it has nothing to do with my plugin, since it is a Pages article, which already supports OG:Image. My plugin only changes forum topics, which currently do not have an automatic OG:Image.

It’s a good feature request. No plans at this time though.

U+0027 is a catch-all character from the days of the early typewriters, where, to keep the number of keys to a minimum, one key had to be used for left and right quotation, prime symbols and apostrophe. Same story for " or the hyphen, which had to be used for all dashes (- – —). All these character were taken over into ASCII, since that was essentially an English typewriter layout. But proper typesetting (as used for printing letterpress books for centuries) already became possible for computers with the 8-bit character sets of the 1980s using 256 character slots, and of course it got even better in the 1990s with Unicode, which reserved a dedicated spot for the apostrophe at U+2019. That’s the real apostrophe, both in design and encoding. The remaining, proper use for ' (0027) and " (0022) is in coding, where they have a distinct function (e.g. enclosing a string), whereas the apostrophe is just one of many text characters here without special treatment.

Sure. Have I claimed something else? No! I said it myself, when I pointed out that the proper apostrophe is not printed on standard keyboards. So why bring that up as an argument? My arguments don’t hinge on that fact. They are valid and sound in spite of this fact, because this fact is logically irrelevant in regards to my arguments. If you would try to understand my arguments, you would see that and not go around in circles all the time. Your argument boils down to: whatever similar looking character can be most easily reached on the keyboard, must be the proper one. If the French speakers you know use ', than that is the proper one. That is wrong. If you don’t know how to reach © on a keyboard, does it mean that this is not the proper sign anymore? Of course not! If you don’t know how to reach a German ß, does it mean B or β are a proper replacement? Of course not. Similar look doesn’t make it the proper sign. Your logic is fundamentally flawed. Take a French grammar book and look up the apostrophe. Do they use ' or ’ as the proper apostrophe sign? There are over 100,000 encoded characters today. Of course they don’t all fit on every keyboard. But just because they aren’t printed there, doesn’t mean that you can make up replacements and call them the proper character. By the way: it’s really interesting how you quote mine this one section of the article, when the rest of the article clearly proofs me right and proofs you wrong. What about this sentence: Why do you ignore that part and just repeat from the article what was never questioned? Sure. And I understood that from the beginning, so there was nothing to discuss. What I objected to was your characterization of ' being the proper apostrophe. That is untrue. If you didn’t know it before, you know it now. You have learned something. Great. We can just move on with our lives. But it’s a waste of time and kind of pathetic do continue to deny it and even laugh at my face, and ignore and misrepresent everything I say. You really rather stay wrong just so you don’t have to admin that you were wrong about that? Why not be happy about having learned that there is actually a proper apostrophe on your keyboard you could reach with a shortcut? I mean, you don’t even have to use it. But you can at least accept that it is there and that it fits every definition of “proper” in terms of grammar, typography and text encoding. Because that’s a fact.

No, thanks. I will continue to correct false statements as I always do. It is up to you to stay ignorant about these matters or decide to learn something new. For other, more open French speakers I repeat the link again: https://www.brunobernard.com/des-textes-plus-elegants-avec-les-apostrophes-typographiques/

That has nothing to do with the language! What I said is true for every language, including French. Feel free to research it yourself if you don’t want to trust an expert typographer who writes books on this subject. Everything I said is factually true. Reacting with “Haha” to the truth is just ignorance.

It’s not printed on you keyboard. But that doesn’t mean that a different character becomes the “proper apostrophe”. That was your claim. It is not true, so I corrected it. That is also not true. 😉 You have the choice to learn the shortcut for the proper apostrophe, which exists for every operating system and every (Latin) keyboard layout including AZERTY. On my computer it’s ALT + Shift + ' for example.

Nope. It isn’t proper just because you can easily reach it on a keyboard. Just like "this" isn’t proper quotation — “this is”. Or « this », depending on the language.