The Item Editor is live!

[BrianFreud]

I've finished writing the item editor.

Now it's time for testing.

You can access the editor on any edit page, for new items and existing items.

Click on that "Open Item Editor" link to start the item editor.

If you run into any bugs or other issues, or if you notice any missing item properties, let me know. For bugs and such, if you can also let me know how you got the bug - what browser you're using, what OS you're running, what you were doing when the bug happened, that kind of thing - it'll be quite helpful in tracking the problem down.

Thanks,
Brian

 

[blend]

I'm not yet familiar with it, now I may have missed something.
the input of the container type yes or no and
Input of years to when using the new editor, Its input results looks broken.

 

[BrianFreud]

For containers, there is an item property.

For dates, what seems broken?

 

[blend]

hmm, this input result , is not displayed here.
This month's Event Moderator items
Login required - Stratics Community Wiki | Stratics

 

[blend]

container type yes or no
my chosen no, but on this page is treated as a container

 

[BrianFreud]

The Sakura test item I don't see to check. For the container, I see what you mean. It looks like the container item property was present, as well as the "works like a container" option that is specific to rares, with contradictory information. When I get back on Tuesday I'll add a check to prevent that contradictory situation.

 

[BrianFreud]

container type yes or no
my chosen no, but on this page is treated as a container

Just got home.

I've been thinking more on this while I was driving. I *think* the contradiction is not 100%, so forcing the choice may not be wise.

UO treats more than just bags and boxes as "container"s. When the wiki "guesses" for "works like a container", it is using the list of item properties from the client to make that guess. This means that things like runebooks and spellbooks are also considered to "work like a container", even though we generally would not consider them so, because to the client, they do "contain" things - scrolls, runes, etc.

On the reverse side, there are a few things that look like containers, but do not function as them. The "Chest of Lost Dreams" and some of the Fuddy Wuddy items are like this; they show the "Contains 0/125 0/400" property, but cannot be opened and at least should not be used as a container. Whether those broken EM items should have "works as a container" properly set to yes or no, I am not sure, since you can put things in, but not get them back out again.

So while I agree that in most cases, the rare item option and the item property go hand-in-hand, the rare item option can also work just as well when paired with "works as a runebook" or "works as a spellbook", and conversely, the item property may apply in some few cases where the rare item option does not. In those cases, if I were to forcethe rare item option and the item property to be synchronized, then one or the other would have to be set incorrectly to pass the test. Rather than force bad data entry, I think it'd better that we just be aware that in most cases, the two should match, so we can fix it whenever one or the other is accidentally set incorrectly.