14

YES we should, this would be useful! Not sure but we may need examples to prove we need this, plz comment or something if u spot em!


10

Yeah! Sure, what are we waiting for? I completely subscribe to this notion of yours: "What? I have to read that without colors?" And I also take it that the feature is implemented yet (as working on SO), so the workload to get it running here is small?


7

YES, answering questions about materials puplished/provided by the RPI Foundation is well within the scope of our site.


6

It looks like there is, although it doesn't appear to be documented anywhere. If you view the site logged out (as an unregistered user) the schematic button doesn't appear on the question or answer form, so at the very least unregistered users can't. I'm guessing (although haven't tested) that the level is 11 rep, because this was the original threshold on ...


6

YES, that would make the use of the tags more helpful for the whole site. I like the consistent scheme of the model tags: pi-a, pi-b, pi-a+, pi-b+, pi-zero, pi-2 as well as the clarification of pi-models. Personally I'd skip the additional prefix raspberry- for these tags as it is more or less redundant - we're talking about the Pi here. However, I am ...


5

This was found to be a bug, and is now fixed - thanks to @goldilocks and the SO staff.


5

Thanks for reporting this. Fix is already waiting in repo for build,so it should be live in next couple hours.


3

We just optimized a bunch of our SVG images, and it introduced a few artifacts. I've replaced the Raspberry Pi sprites. It should be fixed in the next build.


3

We have turned on the site setting to allow for formatted code blocks. There is no default syntax, so you'll need to figure out what tags need to have prettified code blocks.


2

Seems self evident to me. I have been using syntax highlighting for 30 years. I just tried adding <!-- language: lang-bsh --> but it didn't seem to make any difference.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible