I noticed that duplication on your permalinks a while back, when trying to link to one, and discovered I could make the link work by removing the second "#etc". I'm using the new Blogger and not having that problem. However, I'm also hosted elsewhere (not on Blogspot). Now that I look at it, the whole way your links are generated is completely different. My posts are separate files. so that my permalinks are like this: http://www.lightondarkwater.com/...3/lp-to- cd.html. Yours are many to a file, with anchors (or whatever the proper term is) on the specific posts within a file--that's the identifier after the "#". You have an anchor for this post, for instance, defined as (spelling out some of the punctuation so the comment software won't try to process it as HTML): left-angle a name="7506051341229856923" right-angle and "#750..." takes the browser there, but "#750...#750..." does not, obviously.

But this is not helping. All I can think of is to look at your template and see if the tag that should be generating your permanent goes like this--:
left-angle href=Quote$BlogItemPermalinkURL$Quote right-angle

Is there any else between the quotes or between the angle brackets?


FWIW, I've seen the same problem. I have hand-edited the ones I post to remove the duplicated anchor and that helps, but it doesn't do anything about the ones generated by blogger.


Perhaps Blogger has automated the numbering process for Reasons to Homeschool?

(sorry, I don't have a good answer to your question.)


Yes.

Go to the "Edit your Template" page, and find the bit that looks like this

a href="{$BlogItemArchiveFileName$} #{$BlogItemNumber$}"

Only with angle brackets instead of curly brackets. Then delete the

#{$BlogItemNumber$}

So you're left with

a href="{$BlogItemArchiveFileName$}"

Except, again, those are angle brackets, not curly brackets.


I like computers and their bright lights and flashing images.


Wait...how did yo get your Haloscan comments to work in Beta? My own blog lost the link and the only fix I could come up with was in a form of CSS rivaling Ugaritic in complexity. Any ideas?


I'm 99.999% certain that Mark is using classic templates, not the new Beta template system.


Thanks, Tom! Fixed it!


Name:

Email:

URL:

Comment:  ? 

 

Commenting by HaloScan