Look what happens when I type the following character combinations:[ul][li]A < followed by a j : <j[/li]A > followed by a j : >j[/ul]In neither of those cases did I type a semicolon before the j. Perhaps the < and > are getting converted into their HTML character entity equivalents (< and > , respectively), both of which end in a semicolon, and then the text is being scanned for smiley strings.
Doing a View Source confirms your suspicion:
Not only that, but feast your eyes on what comes next:
And, as an aside, for some reason Internet Explorer renders a & followed by an lt without a semicolon as a < .
<j
>j
Huh.
Here’s what I get when I put a less-than followed by a right-paren:
<)
It puts a space in between. Isn’t that weird? Here’s a clumsy way to get around the HOJM bug:
<j
Achernar: How did you do that second example?
Hit the Quote button under his post and you’ll see the coding he used.
This isn’t restricted to just the ;j smiley, of course. Why not just disable smilies when you post?
What if you need a different smiley in the same post?
Then something like your fix-it would have to be used. Or just put a space between, and call it a hamster whoopsie. 
My apologies. It’s just that, seeing as the combo was a greater-than/less-than symbol and a “j”, I presumed it was being used for erudite stuff not normally associated with the smilie.
I’ll back out, now. I know when I’m outta my depth.
Actually, it is.
The problem here is the “hidden semicolon” that gets created when you plop down a < or > sign. The only two smilies that start with a semicolon are ;j and 
– and accidental 's are already taken are of by that automatic space that Achernar discovered gets inserted between a < and a ).
I beg to disagree. I’ve seen accidental instances, for example, of the 
and :o cropping up, where the colon combo gets tangled up in the text. That is what I meant. There are instances, aside from your example, where somehow the program always interprets certain combinations as the formula for a smilie, even when part of a string of characters.
That’s true, but at least people know that the colon is there before they submit.
(And sorry, I didn’t mean to sound confrontational before. Your solution is best when you don’t need any other smileys.)
Agreed. It’s still a bit of a nuisance, though.
Nah, Achernar, not at all, mate. Absolutely no worries there. I’m probably sounding like someone with ruffled fur in this thread. My apologies to all if that’s how I came across – either too much caffiene, or not enough when I post early in the morning!
Hope a solution can be found for the ;j smilie problem, though. Unlike the others, it’s a complicated one to fix, by looks.
(Y’know, I never thought I’d ever get a chance to use the ;j smilie around here. I know I haven’t been helpful, but – thanks! :))
I’ve got to test that less than- parenthesis thing here…
Bra wane: <)
Bra wax: <(
Ket wane: >)
Ket wax: >(
And wane: &)
And wax: &(
Hard space wane: . )
Hard space wax: . (
OK, so it only triggers with ending parentheses (I presume that winking frowns aren’t too common). Ampersands don’t trigger a space or a smiley, even though they should be converted to escape sequences, and hard spaces result in a smiley (if applicable).
Does the insert-a-space duct taping apply if smileys are disabled? Let’s see:
Bra wane: <)
Bra wax: <(
Ket wane: >)
Ket wax: >(
And wane: &)
And wax: &(
Hard space wane: . )
Hard space wax: . (
:o 
:rolleyes: :mad: :eek: ;j :wally :smack: :dubious:
Yep, works for me.