5

Noticed on my answer to a question on BGSE, the preview and the posted answer, the block quote is handled differently:

This is the markup for my rules quote: editor markup

Here is the preview that shows below the editor: edit preview

And here was the final result when posted: enter image description here

Note the two second level block quotes are combined into not just a single 2nd level quote but a single paragraph. The answer has been edited to bring the answer in line with the desired formatting, but the issue still needs to be addressed.

Example:

702.151a Reconfigure represents two activated abilities. Reconfigure [cost] means “[Cost]: Attach this permanent to another target creature you control. Activate only as a sorcery” and “[Cost]: Unattach this permanent. Activate only if this permanent is attached to a creature and only as a sorcery.” 702.151b paragraph 2

Improve this question
2
  • 3
    Interesting. When adding an example into this post, I noticed that a shorter version of paragraph 1 failed to trigger the bug. It also doesn't trigger the bug when it's just a single level quote.
    – Laurel
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 15:31
  • Note: In this case, the preview is wrong and the Markdown->HTML conversion done in SE's backend code is correct (i.e. it's correct as displayed once posted). The CommonMark specification is explicit that an additional block quote can't be there without a blank line between the block quotes: "3. Consecutiveness. A document cannot contain two block quotes in a row unless there is a blank line between them."
    – Makyen
    Commented Feb 17, 2023 at 21:30

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
-4

Frame challenge [see if that slows down the downvotes]

Yes, the two show differently, but the formatting was done poorly in the first place. Simpler to fix the formatting than debug the guesswork the system has to make.
It's hard to tell from a picture of the formatting what it actually was.

>single quote
>>double quote
>>second double quote

will give

single quote

double quote second double quote

whereas

>single quote  
>>double quote  
>>second double quote

gives

single quote

double quote
second double quote

The difference between these is invisible but significant. The second example has two spaces at the end of each line. This is the accepted method to force a new line but not new paragraph. The first has only a return.
This you cannot judge from a picture.

To get true paragraph separation, it should have been

>single quote
>>double quote
>
>>second double quote

which then shows as

single quote

double quote

second double quote

These all show to me as expected in both preview & posted answer.

Looking at the linked answer as it is currently, the format seems to be

>single quote
>>double quote
>>
>>second double quote

which imo correctly shows two non-separated quote paragraphs like this

single quote

double quote

second double quote

Improve this answer
10
  • 1
    The screenshots probably refer to revision 5 of that answer.
    – The Amplitwist
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 15:07
  • Downvote - you disagree that this is the correct way to do it, or you don't like to be shown how to do it properly?
    – Tetsujin
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 15:08
  • 3
    The point is not that there is a 'proper' way to format the block quotes, the problem is the difference between how they are/were handled in the editor preview when writing a question or answer with how they format once submitted. As the question here states the screenshots are from an earlier revision which was edited to solve this functional mismatch.
    – Andrew
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 15:08
  • 4
    My downvote is that this is a BUG REPORT and the work around you suggest is already covered in the question, as it was already applied to the linked question, this needs developer action to bring the editor preview and posted question/answer into parity, not suggestions for ways to work around the problem.
    – Andrew
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 15:09
  • It's not to 'work around it' it's to do it properly in the first place. GIGO.
    – Tetsujin
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 15:11
  • 3
    If it was improper in the first place, the preview in the editor should have parsed it that way in the first place, however the editor preview parsed it in such a way to show the desired result, implying it was proper. If this is how the post will look once submitted, the editor preview code must be changed to properly reflect that and concatenate the lines. (I also do not concede that a line break that was put in being completely ignored is ever proper)
    – Andrew
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 15:13
  • SE always ignores a single line break. When you try to combine that with lists or quotes, you're just giving it a harder job to do.
    – Tetsujin
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 15:13
  • 4
    You just miss the point of the bug. Like others already said and you missed somehow, it's about preview being different, not about "doing it properly". Your answer is great, but not for this specific bug, it's missing the point.
    – Shadow Wizard
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 15:14
  • Can't teach anybody anything new here. Rather moan about a bug than just type it correctly.
    – Tetsujin
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 15:15
  • 2
    That's literally the point of the bug tag on MSE, and again the question says it was done correctly after in an edit. This was NOT looking for teaching, it was looking for a fix.
    – Andrew
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 15:16

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .