Adding a link to a post.

[ardcarp]

When adding a link I just want the url to appear. When the post is opened the url seems to open itself too and I can't edit out bits I don't want to appear.

[Pulcinella]

I'm not sure if this is related: I've not been able to copy and paste a link from my Times app directly into this Write something box, so I tried the Add link instead.
That box initially appears to show a leading 'http://', but that gets overwritten by the pasted in link (which in my case was very long). The link did not work, and I was unable to move the cursor along the box to see the opening characters in case they were the cause of the problem.

[french frank]

When adding a link I just want the url to appear. When the post is opened the url seems to open itself too and I can't edit out bits I don't want to appear.

There are two ways to add a link (as there always were). The difference is in the first way: simply copying and posting the url. On the old board you got the (usually shortened) url in red which was itself a link. But what happens now if you just post the url is that you get this:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/aug/11/government-attacks-on-lawyers-degrading-and-disgusting-say-former-tory-law-officers

The other, much neater way (it always was ) is to highlight one word or words in your post such as *here* or *report in the Guardian*. Select the small 'link' icon in the row of icons above the window (slightly to the right in the row of icons, in the box with Link Unlink Image and Insert video icons). Paste the url in the box that opens and OK. Check the Preview and you should see your selected phrase (here *report in the Guardian*) showing red. When you post - and here I'm keeping my fingers crossed - once you post it should be a link. Is this actually what you meant?

[french frank]

I'm not sure if this is related: I've not been able to copy and paste a link from my Times app directly into this Write something box, so I tried the Add link instead.
That box initially appears to show a leading 'http://', but that gets overwritten by the pasted in link (which in my case was very long). The link did not work, and I was unable to move the cursor along the box to see the opening characters in case they were the cause of the problem.

I can't help on this one, I'm afraid. I hate using my phone for accessing the forum and don't download apps of that kind, only apps that give me instatnt information (bus/train times, weather etc. I copy & paste with difficulty.

[Old Grumpy]

Not much point in posting Times links anyway for us Murdoch refusniks...


...the paywall prevents access to the article.

[Pulcinella]

Not much point in posting Times links anyway for us Murdoch refusniks...


...the paywall prevents access to the article.

I thought that the 'Share' link from a subscriber allowed access to the article.
That's not quite the same as linking to the online edition of the newspaper, which may well be a paywall.

[oddoneout]

I've tried both methods and the only difference seems to be in the amount of space occupied and verbiage displayed. Like ardcarp I would like just the link to appear, not link in coloured box plus preview etc
I suspect that this is not something that can be changed though; design overrides function. Perhaps the reasoning is that it makes it easy to see that there is a link and then decide from the preview whether to open it, for all those busy busy people out there. I didn't have any trouble that I can recollect in seeing links in the old forum and in the context of what is essentially leisure rather than work, doing things at top speed isn't a priority I would suggest.
I have to say I was rather chuffed to discover how to post links properly when commenting BTL on Guardian articles, not least as a great many folks don't seem to have worked it out - I'm not used to that being the case! And that's just reminded me - the links appear just as a coloured text URL - not as a box with all the trimmings.

[french frank]

I've tried both methods and the only difference seems to be in the amount of space occupied and verbiage displayed.

I don't understand this. There is NO additional space taken up at all by the second method. And there is even less verbiage than if you post a url because you just use the message text. I was demonstrating what to do on a laptop/computer. (But then, I can't understand why anyone would use a phone to access the forum if they have a laptop/computer.)

[Old Grumpy]

" (But then, I can't understand why anyone would use a phone to access the forum if they have a laptop/computer.)"

1) My laptop is rarely on and takes an age to "warm up"

2) I access my phone far more often and like to keep up with various fora.

[french frank]

" (But then, I can't understand why anyone would use a phone to access the forum if they have a laptop/computer.)"

1) My laptop is rarely on and takes an age to "warm up"

Not having a serviceable laptop/computer at one's fingertips would be a reason.

2) I access my phone far more often and like to keep up with various fora.

It's probably my inability to multitask, then. If I'm working at my computer it's easy enough to click on a bookmark and peep at what the forum is doing. But if I'm doing something else (going for a walk, doing the shopping, cooking) I wouldn't want to interrupt that activity by getting my mobile out and finding the forum again.

[Old Grumpy]

Not having a serviceable laptop/computer at one's fingertips would be a reason.



It's probably my inability to multitask, then. If I'm working at my computer it's easy enough to click on a bookmark and peep at what the forum is doing. But if I'm doing something else (going for a walk, doing the shopping, cooking) I wouldn't want to interrupt that activity by getting my mobile out and finding the forum again.

Fair dos, FF. Hourses for courses and all that.