I'm not very good with english :-O and I find difficult to explain some concepts, anyway I try with a different view: I think that the current vote is perfect to understand if the article is good. If an article has a good vote usually can be used in a production environment, is robust, is well written, ... But... An article can be written without any error, easy to understand, with a very clean code but maybe it is "just" an example on how to use a specific control or class. I appreciate a good author/writer and usually I vote 5 for these kinds of articles and some of these articles are very useful for the community. The problem is that there are also many other article always well written that maybe have required months of work. I think that an author that share a project so complex should be rewarded in some way. Consider also that the same vote is used for the competitions (monthly competition, vista competition, ...). Now I think that in a competition is not right to compare articles so different. It is like comparing Einstein papers with a cookbook. Maybe both are written without errors but the first is a little more "complex". What do you think? Davide

The world is not ready for this change :)

I think that using 10 values can be a solution (and more easy). Anyway consider that there are also some articles with many high votes that are quite easy. I usually for example vote 5 if the article is well written and about an argument that I known well because I can exactly understand if the content is good. But there are also many other articles very well written and with an advanced argument that I can simply vote again 5. In my opinion these 2 votes are completely different but I must vote both article with the same values. Davide

Some time ago I have posted a suggestion on how to create a better voting system: Vote for complexity of the article Now each user can vote the quality of an article with a value from 1 to 5. Basically my idea is to add another vote for the complexity of the article. With the complexity I would want to measure many factors: -hours/days of work -argument complexity -innovation -usefulness If for example an article is well written (both text and code) but about a very simple argument I can vote 5 for quality and 2 for the complexity. If otherwise an article is not exceptionally well written (maybe with english errors or with difficult to read code) but about a very advanced and useful argument I can vote 3 for the quality and 5 for the complexity. Just my idea ... What do you think? Davide

I think that it is possible (I think that you need some server side code ...) but consider an IP address is not unique for a specific user. -if multiple computers access the internet using a router (NAT) they all share the same IP, so you can block for example an entire office -without a public static IP the same IP can be used from multiple computers (the IP is dynamically assigned by the internet provider) -I think that there are some services used to hide your IP and browse the internet using another IP I'm not an expert on this subject but I think that block the visitor only by the IP is not the right solution. Davide

I'm not an expert on this subject but I think that usually it is not possible because changing a folder permissions require special code permissions that the ASP.NET process doesn't have. Usually if your web application need to write on a folder you must ask the administrator to manually set the write permissions. If you use a shared hosting probably you have a control panel to set the permissions on the folder. Consider also that usually for ASP.NET 2.0 the App_Data directory is already configured with the right write permissions (if configured correctly). Davide

Thanks for your response. You are right I have written a wrong example. Actually I use exactly your syntax. (sorry for the copy and paste bug but I think that the forum has replaced the characters ...). If you want you can see the real page at www.devage.com . As you can see the image at the center of the page use the right syntax but I still receive the wrong request from internet. It is possible that the request came from a search spider or something similar? Here a line of the log that cause the error: 2007-04-19 09:26:49 W3SVC946387459 80.67.115.122 GET /Wiki/Attach.ashx article=homepage&attach=EucalyptoLogoSmall.png&mode=show 80 - XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+SV1;+.NET+CLR+1.1.4322;+.NET+CLR+2.0.50727) www.devage.com 200 0 0 (I hope that the forum display it correctly) Seems to be a XP with IE 6 but it is not always the same. Ideas? Thanks in advance Davide

I think that the & is an xml reserved character, you must use the entity form like this & amp ; (without the spaces). Davide

I have a ASP.NET website that use an HTTP handler (.ashx) to load some images from a database. Like this: ![](Attach.ashx?article=homepage&attach=EucalyptoLogoSmall.png&mode=show) I have created an ASP.NET log to report all the errors and I have noticed that sometime I receive from the internet wrong requests. Basically the request converts the '&' character to '& amp ;' (like an html encoded string). Like this: Attach.ashx?article=homepage& amp ;attach=EucalyptoLogoSmall.png& amp ;mode=show (I have used the spaces inside the '& amp ;' otherwise this forum convert it to &) Do you have an idea on how to solve this problem? Thanks Davide -- modified at 11:26 Friday 20th April, 2007

I think that it is right that a complex article is more "important" then a "short" article. A complex article for me can also be a short algorithm that solve a problem in a new/innovative way. I think that it is only a definition problem. The complexity of an article for me can be: -difficult argument -very innovative solution -long work/study behind -about a new technology -very useful for the community (solve a common problem in an smart way...) Consider also that I think of a complexity value from 1 to 5, so there is some flexibility. Maybe the word complexity it is not the right definition ... I think that with a voting like this the global quality of the articles should improve, because more important articles are more visible. For me an article with quality 5 and complexity 5 should be an extraordinary article, very innovative and well written. Suppose that you write 2 articles (just to better understand my idea): 1-"How to use the .NET TextBox control" 2-"How to write an image recognition system" If both article are well written and without bugs currently I must simply vote for both article 5, there isn't a way to reward more the second article. There isn't any differences from the 2 articles using the current voting system. What do you think? Davide

Opening up the entire attribution system for voting seems to be a good idea but I mean a little different concept. Try to see my response to Emma. Thanks! Davide

You are right and I understand your ideas, but I have a little different concept of complexity. I just try to better explain me with an example. Consider this article: http://www.codeproject.com/library/NeuralNetRecognition.asp and this: http://www.codeproject.com/vista/NetFw3.asp I voted for both articles 5, for me they are both well written and high quality article. But as you can see behind the first article there is a very hard work (probably many months of studying and test I think ...). I think that should be right to have a method to reward an article with so much work. With my "voting style" for example: First article: Quality: 5, Complexity: 5 Second article: Quality: 5, Complexity: 2 or 3 Basically I think of a voting similar to the voting of a diving competition where there is a difficult coefficient. What do you think? Davide

I think that the level (Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced) of the article should be selected by the reader. Maybe with some more levels (1 to 5?). In this way the vote can be weighted by the complexity of the article. For example an article on a little code tricks can be very well written and of high quality but it is "only" a little code tips. es: Quality: 4.8, Complexity: 2.5 Otherwise a complex article about a big project can be not perfect but about a complex and difficult subject and so it is easier to make mistakes/bugs: es: Quality: 3.8, Complexity: 4.7 In the above scenario I think that both articles must be considered good. In this way the vote will be more distributed and more precise. What do you think? Davide

I think that if you are writing a Web Services you need a Web.config not App.Config. Try to rename the file to Web.config Davide

Another solution is to insert a registry entry at: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run You can also create a windows service if you want the process to start without an interactive user.

I think that "Visual C++ / MFC" is the most appropriate.

Hi, Davide Icardi: davideicardi@hotmail.com Thanks !

I have a RSS that I update changing always the same item with the same "link" page because I always update this page. I use this item to notify software update. But my aggregator RSSBandit seems to not mark as unreaded the item also if I change "pubdate" or "guid" attribute. I set the ispermanentlink=false in the guid. What can I do? Can I create and update more items that point to the same page changing only the guid?

Some weeks ago I publish this article "C++ Setup Bootstrapper for .NET" (http://www.codeproject.com/tools/dotNetInstaller.asp) at codeproject. For you what is the right section for this kind of article? For now I use "All Topics, MFC / C++ >> Free Tools >> Tools with source code". This tool is written in C++ but is very useful for .NET users and this section is not visible by .NET users. One idea is to have two attributes, one for the programming language of the article and the other for the target platform (.NET, MFC, Windows, Linux, ...) Thanks for the great web site ... Davide

Is there any way to create UserControls in a different AppDomain of the owner form ? How can I isolate a UserControl created dynamically (for security and loading reasons)? thanks