[=tsuwm]yeahbut, you seem to have put the link in there *twice*....... I ignore it anyway.)

Quote:
tsu forgive me for not being clear, sometimes in trying to cover every base I tend to get too wordy but I thought I had explained that I realized it wasn't right, that I had repeated my effort--resulting in two separate links--because I initially didn't recognize the pasted url as already in link form. Admittedly I can understand your confusion which owes entirely to my laziness


you may have noticed (or not) that many folks 'title' their links with a word like "link"; to me, this obviousizes what you've done...........to obfuscate matters a bit with this software.

link

FAQs

[that was two separate URLs (actually, the same URL with different 'titles', just to prove a point).

Quote:
Of course tsu I couldn't agree more wholeheartedly, if the url is already suitable to link form, the second "name" link or "'link' link" or whatever seems pointless but you and I might be using the terms "link" and "url" in a different ways. By url I understand an address which may or many not be suitable for pasting into a post such as this; if not it stays black and can screw up the appearance of the entire thread and requires 21 keystrokes to rectify

If the original url (address) is however already acceptable to link use, pasting turns it purple (or blue?) with underline and no further action is required unless you want for some reason to title it, in which case of course you spend another 21 keystrokes processing


now, back to the matter at hand.. when you first click on 'Create a link to a webpage' (and.......... finish editing your post and the click the Submit button. et voila.


[quote]Yes again my apologies, I did in fact use that very system successfully yesterday in our Miscellaney forrum Admin need help thread and hope I duly thanked you for explaining how it's done. What I had thought I finally wound up with was the link "anything" in purple (or is it blue) followed by the URL in black, and that's what I said above "I rather like" since it provides a quick clickableness but at the same time retains the original url for the reader's benefit. Huzzah

However I didn't realize that upon submission the url would be deleted, leaving only the link, "anything" This method is ok of course if you know how if he's curious the reader has quick means to recover the original url

Still my hope would save even him a few keystrokes. It was for a quick means of transforming a "defective" url into linkable form without the need for the additional link containing the comment and of course that's exactly what one gets when the original url is already in linkable form when pasted. I had merely hoped there was an easy way to place a "defective" one in that form without 21 additional keystrokes but evidently there isn't




dalehileman