@goldPseudo It seems inconsistent. Some redirect to the correct book and the correct location. Some redirect to the correct book, but not the correct paragraph\page so the text is not found there. Some redirect to their homepage or to a blank with only the site's headers and footers.
if there were a lot of these with a discernable pattern, i could (maybe) try to get the developers to just update the database with a regexp or something.
otherwise, we just get to manually fix them as they show up and hope there's not too many.
@goldPseudo Is there a way to run the common mark upgrade script manually? I was editing some old posts which have not been updated yet, and I see that if I edit them the quotes would be displayed incorrectly. I would rather not fix them manually.
As I understand it, any posts that the upgrade script would've worked on have already been fixed, so if it's still broken that's because the script couldn't do anything.
so for those weird edge cases that didn't get caught, i can try poking a dev.
(as far as i know, the only reason the "broken" posts still display properly is because the script literally did nothing to them, so the original rendered HTML was still cached)
Salam, I don't really get what is the benefit of this weird upgrade. In the earlier version searching and finding was easier (even if using google on islamweb still might be more constructive)
and what I liked the most you could easily jump to sources of references and CV's of mentioned people
Multi-paragraph quote blocks within lists bug
The automatic migration on Movies & TV omitted this answer, either because it failed to convert it into an HTML that didn't change or because it didn't recognize it as a case that needs adaptation.
However, it clearly needs it since it has both multi-...
it looks like this was one of the issues that they couldn't quite figure out.
@UmH i wonder if the whitespace you have in some of the blank lines might've confused the script into thinking it was supposed to be a list, even when it wasn't.
not sure why that one wouldn't've been caught by the script otherwise. it definitely caught plenty of "insert a > in the blank line between two blockquotes" cases.
looks like you got about thirty posts that would be affected by this.
seems like the markdown script just hates you personally. :p
(and by "about thirty", i'm referring to that particular conflation of broken blockquotes and islamweb links. i'm sure there's a lot more broken blockquotes otherwise.)
I found around 50 of my own answers which cited islamweb library. 21 of them still had correct functional links. 13 have now been fixed because the links had broken or were no longer pointed to the correct part of the text. At least 7 are pending because of the added work of common mark migration. 8 are pending because there was no text quoted in the answer so I need to more thoroughly read and verify that they are linked to the relevant part of the text.
Overall I think hadith references seem to have been effected the most, the urls with 'hadith' in them no longer work. The problem with the tafsir and fiqh references is that the text seems to have been reorganized, so the relevant part is sometimes no longer on the linked page but is a few pages ahead.
@Islam.SE what do you folks think about a Languages site on codidact? i too wanted an arabic site on se, but apparently its area51 proposals haven't been successful, so if this site becomes realised on codidact, there would be a place for arabic questions