[wp-hackers] single quote in content ends up as Unicode Character 'RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK'

Tue May 27 12:57:51 UTC 2014

Okay, I see now.

Then, in that case I'm not sure whether you can use a custom field to do
that same thing. It's just a thought and will probably decrease the ease of
use, but what about the following:

You have a single text area custom field that will hold all of your
structured data. It won't be affected by any of the filtering functions,
other plugins, etc.
In there if you need to(I'm not sure what your goal is), you can define
multiple data sets, or just a single one - based on whether you need to
have one or multiple sets of data.

Your shortcode will then look-up that data and if you have multiple sets of
data, find the correct one and do whatever it's supposed to do with it.

Again - that might make it a bit harder to use and design(especially if you
have to separate multiple data sets), but will save you the filters
headaches.

Nikola

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Haluk Karamete <halukkaramete at gmail.com>wrote:

> THank you Nikola, for your interest in this.
>
> As to your point on
>
> I'm guessing you're not manually entering structured data in the shortcode,
> > but are generating it instead?
> >
>
> I'm doing exactly that - that is manually entering structured data in the
> shortcode.
>
> I am planning to use this shortcode as a development tool, a utility to
> pass safe data between the front and the back-end. with 0 eval.
>
> This is a concept that I put a lot of time thinking about. When it shapes
> up and matures, and hence becomes worthwhile to talk about or share, I will
> do so.
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 5:14 AM, Nikola Nikolov <nikolov.tmw at gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Slightly off-topic, but Haluk - what are you trying to do with structured
> > data in shortcodes and aren't there any other options to store that data?
> >
> > I'm guessing you're not manually entering structured data in the
> shortcode,
> > but are generating it instead?
> >
> > Simply because if you find a different way to store and access this data.
> > you'll save yourself all of the troubles that you're having at the
> > moment(and such solutions can always conflict with some plugin in the
> > future) :)
> >
> > Nikola
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Haluk Karamete <halukkaramete at gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Otto,
> > >
> > > I've found a solution to the issue. ( I tested and saw it works )
> > >
> > > I simply switched point of views: Instead of protecting the structured
> > data
> > > within the <code></code> area ( which is problematic as my prev message
> > > pointed out) and make that section immune to the wptexturize, I went
> the
> > > other way. I made the entire shortcode to be exempt from the
> wptexturize
> > > and mark the content-content section  using a non-HTML delim (that the
> > > visual tab editor cannot do anything about ) and apply the wptexturize
> > > myself in the back end.
> > >
> > > The simple steps are as follows;
> > >
> > > step 1
> > > use the no_texturize_shortcodes filter and made the shortcode to be
> > exempt.
> > >
> > > step 2
> > > simply wrap the content area in my shortcode that I want to be
> processed
> > by
> > > wptexturize in {content}{content} delims.
> > >
> > > step 3
> > > in the back end, when processing the $content in my shortcode function,
> > > simply do
> > >
> > > $content = wptexturize($content);
> > >
> > > - to apply the wptexturize magic over that section
> > >
> > > This gives me piece of mind that the section that is not wrapped in
> > > {content}{content}  blocks are not processed by the wptexturize -
> thanks
> > to
> > > the step 1.
> > >
> > > This approach has solved my problem.
> > >
> > > Now I will see what I can do to do for the little brother of
> wptexturize
> > > which is wpautop. :)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 3:55 AM, Haluk Karamete <
> halukkaramete at gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > Otto,
> > > >
> > > > The wp_texturize has a great functionality; If you use the HTML tag
> > > <code>
> > > > & </code> in your shortcode content area, it leaves that section
> > > untouched.
> > > > This way you can create sections within your shortcode as to which
> area
> > > > wp_texturize to operate on or off.
> > > >
> > > > So for all the special symbols used within the <code> & </code>
> block,
> > > > (such as the single quote <code>'</code>), I get them as is. For
> > example,
> > > > for the ', I get it as '. I do not get the ’ anymore. The
> <code>
> > > > feature simply takes care of the problem - in a brilliant way.
> > > >
> > > > But...
> > > >
> > > > If when you switch the post editor's Tiny MCI's visual tab, that
> > simple &
> > > > innocent action ( which is irreversible ) removes the <code> and
> > </code>
> > > > tags permanently and replaces them with  ! Then all bets are
> off.
> > > >
> > > > Is it possible to prevent that from happening so that the structured
> > data
> > > > area that I'm trying to protect thru the <code></code> in my
> shortcode
> > is
> > > > immune to those innocent and accidental switches that may happen
> > anytime
> > > on
> > > > the user's end?
> > > >
> > > > I thought of tapping into the no_texturize_shortcodes filter - as
> > > expained
> > > > here (
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://codex.wordpress.org/Plugin_API/Filter_Reference/no_texturize_shortcodes
> > ),
> > > as a different way to tackle the whole thing...
> > > >
> > > > But I sense that that would assume the entire content area of the to
> be
> > > > avoided by the wp_texturize.
> > > >
> > > > My shortcode has two sections... the regular content area section...
> > and
> > > > the code section that has the code instructions ..  I'd like to be
> able
> > > to
> > > > separate these  two sections ( code and content ) from one another.
> > > >
> > > > In other words, I'd like wp_texturize to do what's designed for on
> the
> > > > "content-content" area in my shortcode but leave the "content-code"
> > > section
> > > > alone..
> > > >
> > > > If the <code></code> were to be preserved upon the visual-tab
> switch, I
> > > > would be done with this issue and programming the parser now. But I
> > > cannot
> > > > move on at this moment before I nail this issue in a future proof
> way.
> > > >
> > > > What do you think can be done to pull this wish off?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> That would be the wptexturize function.
> > > >>
> > > >> http://codex.wordpress.org/Function_Reference/wptexturize
> > > >>
> > > >> -Otto
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Haluk Karamete <
> > > halukkaramete at gmail.com
> > > >> >wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > This is a trickty one...
> > > >> >
> > > >> > When I type in ' ( which is a simple single quote) in the content
> > area
> > > >> in
> > > >> > my shortcode, I see that it ends up as a 'right single quotation
> > mark'
> > > >> that
> > > >> > is ’
> > > >> >
> > > >> > That's observation #1.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > It gets even more interesting, but when I put two of them, one
> after
> > > the
> > > >> > other  like this, ( '' ) , I ended up with ”  ( instead of
> > > >> > ’’).
> > > >> >
> > > >> > This is very confusing to me cause I'm middle of parsing my
> > structured
> > > >> data
> > > >> > based shortcode. The content area interferes with me big time.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Could you tell me which WordPress function(s) involve here so
> that a
> > > >> > simple good old (') single quote ends up with ’? Could you
> > point
> > > >> me
> > > >> > the location where this is happening?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > With that location, I'm hoping to see the complete view of what
> > other
> > > >> > conversion are happening that my parser be aware of.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thank you
> > > >> > _______________________________________________
> > > >> > wp-hackers mailing list
> > > >> > wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> > > >> > http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> > > >> >
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> wp-hackers mailing list
> > > >> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> > > >> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > wp-hackers mailing list
> > > wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> > > http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > wp-hackers mailing list
> > wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> > http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> >
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>