style_system | Unwelcome arrow links surrounding tags

So, as of DW's latest code push, I'm seeing little arrow-shaped links on either side of every single tag on my journal entries. These links do nothing more useful than point to the last entry using that tag (or worse, an error page, if there's no earlier/later entry to point to). This seems like utterly redundant, pointless clutter to me.

Very simply, I do NOT want to be seeing these arrow links. If someone could provide me with some code for getting rid of them, I would tremendously appreciate it. Thank you.

Current Mood: annoyed

Tags:

entries:tags

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

ariestess

I'd love to find a way for them to go away, too. I really don't like the way they look.

From:

branchandroot

This seems to do it for the individual entry pages, which is the only place I've noticed them so far:

.page-entry .tag ul li a:first-child,
.page-entry .tag ul li a:last-child { display: none; }

Put that in your theme's Custom CSS, and as long as you're viewing a page in your own style it should remove them. If you want something that will have an effect across the site, you can put it in a Stylish style for the whole domain dreamwidth.org. To get them all, you'll need to look at the classes on the outermost div of all the pages you see them on and add more lines with that class instead of .page-entry.

From:

jordannamorgan

Oh, THANK YOU SO MUCH! It worked! :D I am *so* relieved.

(And because of other customizations, I view all DW pages in my own style by default, so that won't be a problem.)

From:

filialucis

Thanks so much! I agree with the OP that those arrows are utterly pointless clutter and I was afraid I'd be in over my head in trying to kill them. I know nothing about CSS, but just copy-pasting your code into my custom CSS seems to have done the trick!

From:

turlough

Thank you!!!!

From:

worlds_of_smoke

Hm. For some reason, it's not working for me. Maybe because I use killcaps CSS?

From:

branchandroot

No, your killcaps CSS looks correct and closed up and all. The new CSS is showing up as it should. The the tag list nesting and the classes on the body element look standard, so it doesn't seem as if individual pages are likely to not be classed page-entry, though I can't see any entries in your own journal to check for sure. You might want to double-check that, though. Look at the html source for an entry page, find the "body" tag that comes right after "/header", and see if it has the class "page-entry". If not, that's the problem. If it does have the right class, I'm not sure what could be wrong. Just to be sure, are you viewing all pages in your own style?

The only other thing that I can think of that could go wrong is if your browser is too old to understand "first-child" and "last-child". Those a relatively recent additions to CSS, and if you're running a browser version from a few years back it may not be able to parse them. ...though, in that case your layouts would likely have significant issues in other places as well. *hands* Other than that, no idea.

Oh, wait, one more idea. If your browser caches metadata like style sheets for faster loading, you may have to clear your browser cache and reload the page before the browser even "sees" the new CSS. Google "clear browser cache" if you've never done that, directions vary a lot between browsers.

From:

worlds_of_smoke

I keep my Firefox up to date, so I don't think that's the problem. I view all pages in my style.

I have this for the body class.

"<body class="page-read two-columns column-left any-column multiple-columns two-columns-left logged-in my-journal not-subscribed has-access has-navstrip">"

I have no idea how to change that if I need to, though.

(I have no clue if that's helpful. My CSS ends at copy-pastaing things.)

From:

branchandroot

That should be the body tag on your Reading page. The body classes change depending on what kind of page you're on. page-reading for Reading, page-entry for pages, etc.

If you're seeing the tag arrows on your Reading page, that's a bug and you should report it. They're not supposed to show up on the aggregate pages like Reading or Recent Entries.

I'd try clearing your browser cache and reloading an entry page, to see if that works.

From:

ninetydegrees

They do show up on Recent entries if you click on a tag to filter them (had to add some code to make sure tags displayed on 'full' recent pages). Maybe that's what's going on on their reading page too.

From:

branchandroot

Ah, yes indeed, there they are on a tag-filtered Reading page. Let me go and add that to the css snippet. If a filtered Recent Entries shows them, then page-recent too.

From:

worlds_of_smoke

Nope, I'm not seeing them on my reading page. I rebooted FF and verything else seems to be okay. Thanks. :)

From:

ex_lockcade543

Many thanks for providing this!

From:

branchandroot

New and improved, catch-them-all CSS snippet:

.page-entry .tag ul li a:first-child,
.page-entry .tag ul li a:last-child,
.page-recent .tag ul li a:first-child,
.page-recent .tag ul li a:last-child,
.page-reading .tag ul li a:first-child,
.page-reading .tag ul li a:last-child { display: none; }

From:

jordannamorgan

Thank you! :)

From:

jordannamorgan

Oops... spoke too soon. After putting in the expanded code, I found that my main journal page had stopped showing tags altogether! They did show up properly (and without arrows) everywhere else.

For the moment I've switched back to the original, smaller bit of code, so I'll at least have arrow-less tags on the pages most important to me. (Of course, I would certainly *like* to get the arrows off the tag-filter pages too--if it won't make the tags on my main page go poof.)

From:

branchandroot

*facepalm* Of course it did. That was why I didn't put those in to start with, because those classes are the classes of unfiltered reading and recent-entries pages also, and the first child then is the tag itself. And... *goes to check* no, there aren't any other classes added to a filtered page, so no luck.

Okay, looks like the original version with just .page-entry is the only option for now! I imagine the arrows will get some kind of class when the next round of patches goes in. I haven't actually looked at their generation code, but that's usually a fairly simple addition in the S2 code.

From:

marahmarie

Try this (but don't thank me - and yes, I'm using it, too): http://dw-news.dreamwidth.org/36470.html?thread=5153398#cmt5153398. As far as I can tell, it should work with all custom CSS.

(convert the last bits to display: none - "-moz-begone: vile creature" won't work - though considering the monstrosity it's hiding, I don't see why not)

Edited (left my reply in the wrong spot yesterday, sorry about that) Date: 2015-01-22 01:59 am (UTC)

From:

branchandroot

I appreciate that you're trying to help, but can you please keep in mind that the volunteers who work on patches like this are users of the site just like you and me, and read this comm? I totally understand if you don't like the function, and contributing an interim fix that a lot of people wouldn't know how to put together is generous of you, but using that kind of language about the hard work someone put in on a patch that was requested and voted on in the suggestions comm, where that someone has a better than even chance of stumbling over the comment, is unnecessary and unkind.

From:

marahmarie

It's not "that kind of language", it's a simple statement of my opinion, and it has nothing to do with my feelings toward the author of the patch and I'm sorry but I can't help it if you are construing it any other way.

From what I understand the dev was not able to include CSS with their patch because a) he or she doesn't work with CSS very much so it was not on their mind (but the person has since apologized for this where even I don't think that was necessary, but it was very nice of them to do).

And there is nothing technically wrong with the patch! As executed, it is working exactly as intended. It's not so easy to modify via CSS or even any predictable backend tweaks because of what tweaking it to only show when actually useful, for example, would do to our server loads.

I'm not knocking the patch for any of that; it was executed well and exactly as it should be. I just don't like the looks of the arrows. And if you're going to rail at me for that, then I would like you to visit the most recent DW News page and make a similar rail against the literally dozens - if not hundreds - of other users who have expressed exactly the same displeasure over exactly the same thing - the overall unsightliness and visual clutter and confusion of it. From a strictly visual perspective, a lot of us agree that it looks awful.

Again, I am not knocking what this dev has contributed; it was probably one of the toughest patches anyone besides fu has coded up for DW in a long time, and for that this person definitely has my admiration, especially considering the sheer amount of direct - and definitely undeserved - blowback the are getting for it in the DW News comments now.

From:

branchandroot

Terms like "begone: vile creature" and "monstrosity" are not simple statements of opinion, they are derogatory. I'm happy to hear you do appreciate the difficulties involved in coding a feature like this, and the extent to which some objections to the feature got personal in some very unpleasant ways. If that understanding were reflected in your current comments, I wouldn't have felt the need to remark, but, as you note, the response has been immoderate to say the least. Repeating terms like "vile creature" and "monstrosity" feed that fire, and now that the heat of the moment has passed I'd really appreciate it if you could use some less inflammatory ones to express your opinion. That's a fire that really, really doesn't need more fuel; quite the reverse. I think a little effort to tone down our expressions, as for example you do in the above comment, is a useful move right now. I can assure you, I'm making that effort myself as well.

From:

marahmarie

Yes, my intent - while never clearly stated until one comment ago - was not to inflame but more simply to remark on my dislike of the looks of the new feature. But I don't view "the looks of the new feature" as being the dev's fault, either, since arrows are arrows and there is no making them look any better, and arrows are what was chosen for this project, a decision which I doubt was within the dev's control as it was a compromise chosen over other possible implementations for a number of reasons.

And my reason for linking to the comment in question (which I have not explained until now, either, so just to clear that up) was to not give myself credit for what I viewed as the best way to code for this issue, as it belongs to the person making the less-than-diplomatic comments, not to me. I have a thing about not taking credit unless of course I would've thought of that solution myself (but I would never have thought of that one, I can assure anybody).

I was probably thinking that since the patch dev has been responding to comments in the DW News post pretty diligently even if they're not directly addressed to them and even if they do seem at least a bit inflammatory in nature that my agreeing with the tone of the comment I linked to was not a big deal (or otherwise I would never have put things the way I did - and no, just because I justified it to myself that way at the time does not make it right - not in hindsight).

Point taken all around; if the dev is or was hurt by and/or has expressed to you or anyone that my comments are an issue then I apologize, both for the tone of my words and for not thinking much more on this before posting - so as to save the feeding of any and all fires - and I thank you for having this discussion with me.

Edited (clarity, and more clarity because my brain is just not together tonight) Date: 2015-01-22 05:30 am (UTC)

From:

jordannamorgan

I tried the code there, and it seemed to do exactly the same thing the original short bit of code from

branchandroot does. I still had arrows on the tag-filter pages, which I believe is the one remaining place they need to be killed. (The expanded version of the other code did that... but it also ate the tags on my main page, so no joy.)

From:

marahmarie

Sorry about that. I checked the code on my DW before posting about it and didn't see the arrows showing up on any view (I still don't, which kind of worries me, since I'm not sure which view would be the one in question that it doesn't work on).

I'm glad you got a better answer in the comments below (and I'm going to try that solution myself, just to make sure I'm getting rid of the arrows on every possible view).

Edited Date: 2015-01-22 05:04 am (UTC)

From:

royalball

Changed some things around with

yurikhan's code and came up with a fix that also gets rid of the spaces between the tag link and the commas, which drive me fucking crazy:

.tag li{
font-size: 0px !important;
}
.tag-text {
font-size: inherit;
}
.tag a {
font-size: [your layout's font size for tags];
}
.tag li:after {
content: ",";
font-size: [your layout's font size for tags] !important;
}
.tag li:last-child:after {
content: ""; 
}
.tag li>a:not([rel=tag]) { 
font-size: 0px;
}

Edit: I fixed it.

Edited Date: 2015-01-22 03:30 am (UTC)

From:

jordannamorgan

Um... that made my tags on my main journal page completely disappear again. *sigh*

So, I'll still have to stick with

branchandroot's first bit of code. Annoying spaces still, but no arrows anywhere except tag-filter pages, at least.

From:

royalball

Did you make sure to fill in your layouts text size where it says "[your layout's font size for tags]"? The font size on your journal looks like 13px so this should work:

.tag li{
font-size: 0px !important;
}
.tag-text {
font-size: inherit;
}
.tag a {
font-size: 13px;
}
.tag li:after {
content: ",";
font-size: 13px !important;
}
.tag li:last-child:after {
content: "";
}
.tag li>a:not([rel=tag]) {
font-size: 0px;
}

Sorry I wasn't clear enough.

From:

jordannamorgan

...You have just made me so incredibly happy. :D Not only no spaces, but no arrows that I can see *anywhere*, even on the tag filter pages! *JOY* Thank you so much!

(And sorry for the mixup. I saw you had edited the comment a few times, but you took out the separate note about changing the font size, so I thought it was just copy/paste then. My bad for not paying attention to the instruction within the actual code.)

From:

royalball

Oh jeez I'm so sorry! I didn't test it enough in other circumstances before I originally posted it and I messed up one of my edits while trying to fix it too. Glad I could help you out!

From:

jordannamorgan

No problem! Like I said, I'm just beyond thrilled to finally have the desired result! :)

(Now I can go back to my own business, and forget all the drama that's developed everywhere over the whole thing...)