Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
The stupid question is the question not asked
 
PerlMonks  

background in <readmore> tags

by John M. Dlugosz (Monsignor)
on Jun 04, 2009 at 22:14 UTC ( #768600=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

I added a <readmore> tag to a 7K meditation after the first (intro) paragraph, to make it more friendly in the Meditations page (and perhaps the front page, people start FPing meditations more).

I was surprised to find the background turn grey. Why should the background be shaded just because I wanted it abstracted in the pages that display multiple nodes?

Furthermore, the background cut right to the edge of the text, without any padding, so the first char was actually hard to read sometimes. It's poor layout.

I added

div.readmore { background-color: inherit }
to my user settings under "display" here in Monks, and canceled the effect. I wonder if the powers that be might consider getting rid of that, or making it more subtle and applying the effect better.

—John

Comment on background in <readmore> tags
Download Code
Re: background in <readmore> tags
by ww (Bishop) on Jun 05, 2009 at 00:07 UTC
    John...

    I don't see this effect (default pm style, no local overrides; FF 3.0.10 on w32 and 1.5.0.12eol on Linux-Ubuntu).

    Could it be that some of your display settings or some local override on styles is the root of the unsatisfactory rendering?

      With the same specs (FF 3.0.10 on WinXP), I see grey if I go to a domain at which I'm not logged in. (e.g. http://perlmonks.pair.com/?node_id=768595) Maybe it's too subtle for your monitor settings to display?

      Personally, I like the shading.

Re: background in <readmore> tags (concrete)
by tye (Cardinal) on Jun 05, 2009 at 03:23 UTC

    For all of the combinations that I just tried, the effect was quite subtle and so provided no interference in readability. For those wanting to see how their environment renders this effect, visit Reflections on “Higher Order Perl” §1.1 (why make people go searching for what you are talking about?).

    The reason there is no added padding is because the shading difference is so subtle that none is required (not for me nor for the others who have contributed to this feature). If you have a level of padding that looks better in your environment, then you might want to donate the markup that produced it, since I have no way of testing anything in your environment (and I don't have a problem with the way things currently look, obviously) and if you provide "the code", then you are much more likely to get your desired change made (less work and less guesswork for the people that have to make the change), others can even try out your mark-up in their environment and provide feedback / alternatives.

    If the shading isn't subtle enough, then you might want to note what CSS resulted in suitably subtle shading in your environment.

    Thank you for providing the example so that other users can disable this feature for themselves if they so desire.

    Why should the background be shaded just because I wanted it abstracted in the pages that display multiple nodes?

    Yes, why should <readmore> have any visual indication at all? It was much funner when people would frequently wonder if they'd used the feature correctly because it seemed to have no effect at all. And the way it was done makes it so terribly hard to customize, as you discovered. :)

    Actually, one of the most effective uses of the feature is when people view a node and worry that it is too long to be approved or front-paged or that they should consider it in hopes of having <readmore>s added. People who worry about that stuff very quickly learn that the subtle background change means "readmore" and so can judge immediately whether the node is appropriate to approve or front-page or consider.

    Oh, I realized that I have my monitor gamma cranked down because I find the default settings make things rather whitewashed (to me) but testing with the default gamma settings makes the feature even more subtle, so the impact for readability of this feature is greater with my settings than it would normally be... Except in the "Dark theme". With default gamma in my environment, I would make the background change more subtle for the Dark theme.

    But you don't appear to be using the Dark theme. So I'll wait to see if you provide more details and concrete suggestions. As to the one suggestion that was concrete, I see much more benefit in having the shading enabled by default (also because people who hate the effect usually have a much easier time adjusting or disabling it, as you did, compared to how easy it would be for people who don't see the feature to figure out how to enable it).

    - tye        

      Limbic~Region wondered if it's only for preview. I assumed it was and was surprised to see it after submitting. But, that suggests to me, with your explanation for the purpose of the feature, that it apply to ones own nodes only, in the same situations when you have the text box for updating.

      The css for the default theme has that background at color 238 x 3, or #EEE.

      The flush-to-the-edge of the text might be more of an issue with an LCD monitor, since it anti-aliases across pixel boundaries.

      As for being (not) hard to fix, it's only simple if you have browser tools available and know how to use them. I had first looked at the provided settings and not finding it there dug in to the DOM explorer.

        But, that suggests to me, with your explanation for the purpose of the feature, that it apply to ones own nodes only, in the same situations when you have the text box for updating.

        Then you clearly didn't read my explanations for comprehension.

        - tye        

      I'm really torn on this one. I never really made the different color/readmore connection, so up till now it hasn't been enhanching my experience (beyond making the Monastery more mysterious). So I think I would like to see something more obvious. Maybe you could show the open and closing tag in a shade of gray so that the "readmore" word itself is visible (much like the HTML warnings for missing tags in preview). I agree that the default should be to have some form of readmore indicator turned on.

      Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks

Re: background in <readmore> tags
by ambrus (Abbot) on Jun 05, 2009 at 20:00 UTC

    I don't like the changed background either, and I had sucessfully turned it off. The relevant section from my user css in Display settings is this. Note "transparent".

    div.readmore { background-color: transparent; padding-left: 2px; borde +r-left-width: 2px; border-left-color: #080; border-left-style: solid +}
      So that displays as a green bar left of the readmore section, but not slammed up against the characters, right?

      I used "inherit" rather than "transparent". But after reading the other responses on the thread, I changed it to a lighter grey that has the intended appearance.

      Later: I like that much better. I changed mine to have a larger gap and lighter color.

      Add a margin-left: -xx where xx is the sum of your chosen padding and border, to prevent the content from being shifted right relative to the rest. This way the text is in its normal position and the bar is in the existing left margin.

      My current settings:

      tr.reply-body ul.indent font[size="2"] { font-size: 100% } div.readmore { background-color: inherit; padding-left: 4px; border-left-width: 3px; border-left-color: #DfE; border-left-style: solid; margin-left: -7px; } textarea { width: 100% }
      —John

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://768600]
Approved by Limbic~Region
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others rifling through the Monastery: (5)
As of 2014-12-27 10:58 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (177 votes), past polls