Re: No recognition that any copyright claim could be valid, eh?
Satire tends to be less effective when you include a paragraph of small-print explaining the precise contours and limitations of the commentary. I'm sorry if this particular joke went over your head but we are confident most of our audience is smart enough to understand it.
Good to know - I'll definitely keep it in mind that some people may make use of that. More likely though, what we'll offer is a user/cookie-level setting that lets you request all full posts on the blog, with no hiding/expanding (maybe we can make this accessible via URLstring as well, for those who want no form of preference tracking whatsoever).
When we next update the site (which we are working on) I'll be doubling down on the use of proper semantic tags so that everything works well in default formatting. Though, if you WOULD like to get the bulk of our CSS back without ditching the entire stylesheet, you should be able to achieve that using just a couple overrides:
As for the last bit, yeah, I figure there's a way to probably make it work entirely via CSS with some creative use of :focus and :target -- I used some much simpler versions of those tricks on the Survival Fund site -- so I'm definitely keeping that in mind.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Javascript sealed away in a tomb
(I realize minimizing Javascript on the site itself could be called pointless when the checkout requires it -- but, for me, the sole purpose isn't just making it possible to use the web without JS at all. It's also just making it so using the web doesn't **suck** -- because I freaking hate when simple websites are loading up entire application frameworks and being massive CPU hogs and so on.)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Javascript sealed away in a tomb
Sadly yeah, we have no control over Foxycart and currently no better option for payment processing. I had hoped it would offer a non-JS flow (and I think it might? check to make sure it's not that Tor browser issue) but yeah, some limitations there I acknowledge.
But I did the best I could. I didn't bring the Foxycart javascript into our page, which is the "recommended" method and would have loaded up their entire API just for one product link (and would have turned the shopping cart into a JS-driven sidebar thing on the page, rather than a new URL).
As for what I had direct control over - the site itself - there are only two tiny bits of Javascript. One is for the quick 20/50/100/etc. links to choose donation amounts. The popup interface itself is all controlled via CSS, but there's no way at all to change the value of a form field based on a link click without JS, so it uses a quick two-line function to do that.
Even smaller is a bit of JS for the dialogue you get when returning to the page after donating (which you can see by adding #thanks to the url). Again the whole thing is CSS-driven (opening & closing done using the :target pseudoclass rather than any JS) but, because I personally hate when modal dialogues are *only* closeable by their "X" button but not by clicking somewhere outside the dialogue, I added one line of JS to close the modal on background click too (which couldn't, in any way I could figure out, be accomplished with pure CSS except perhaps by some very ugly and markup-heavy trickery).
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Javascript sealed away in a tomb
Collapsable sections would be a useful semantic/accessibility feature to standardize, so browsers could have uniform handling across sites.
This soooooort of exists now in the form of the HTML5 "summary" and "details" tags, though implementation is iffy and it's a long way from being usable for even slightly-complex functionality like our post expanders, sadly. Really that's because "collapsable" isn't especially semantic - many things that are very different in meaning might need to be collapsed in a user interface, and thus there is a "details" tag that does not really apply to "the body of a post".
Some more details for those interested re: the Expand function.
When we built it we considered it very important to make sure it wouldn't just "degrade" but would not be required at all. The native page loads with static "Read More" links that point to the article page as normal; the JS, if executed, replaces those links with "Expand" buttons.
Of course, one of the flaws in the expanders (especially for those loading without JS) is that the full text of all the articles is loaded with the page right now, which is pretty inefficient for the majority of people who don't expand all of them (and completely useless for non-JS users). So we're strongly considering changing it in the future to only load snippets with the page, and request the rest of the post content dynamically on expanding.
You should appreciate the site I built for the Techdirt Survival Fund then :) Aaaaalmost no JS at all, and no reliance on what tiny amount there is (though one small feature doesn't degrade quite as gracefully as it technically could).
That said, I really really really like JS as a language. But I agree that treating simple websites as full-fledged apps running on massive frameworks is stupid and infuriating.
Or, go the opposite way: allow companies to register pretty much whatever they want as potentially identifying marks, but require them to demonstrate actual and substantial customer confusion, with evidence, in order to make any kind of claim against someone else using the same or a similar mark.
How about something asinine drawn out in patent application style, with little figures and text descriptions.
I had been thinking about this general thing, but never really came up with a good specific idea. Also not sure how well I can replicate that technical drawing style - but, it's in the back of my brainstorming mind somewhere!
Glad to know the shirts are good! There are a few different base shirt options we can choose from, but we've always stuck with one particular premium line that seemed like the best choice.
At least 50% of the time when I write these with a billion old post tabs open, I manage to put the wrong year down somewhere. And about 10% of those times, I fail to catch it before publishing.
But so far you commenters have a 100% success rate on calling me out! :)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Donated - why do you need my address etc?
Before writing about copyright abuse, NSA surveillance and net neutrality, it was critical that we all master PHP backend e-commerce architecture, naturally.
We tried to make those fields optional and even remove some outright - but for some bizarre reason paypal started rejecting payments that weren't filled out on the foxycart side. As far as we can tell it's an integration issue between the two, and we haven't yet found a way to fix it.
On the post: Takedown Gear Is Back Up! (Plus Another Returning Design)
Re: No recognition that any copyright claim could be valid, eh?
On the post: Tim Berners-Lee Endorses DRM In HTML5, Offers Depressingly Weak Defense Of His Decision
Re: Re: Javascript expanders
Good to know - I'll definitely keep it in mind that some people may make use of that. More likely though, what we'll offer is a user/cookie-level setting that lets you request all full posts on the blog, with no hiding/expanding (maybe we can make this accessible via URLstring as well, for those who want no form of preference tracking whatsoever).
When we next update the site (which we are working on) I'll be doubling down on the use of proper semantic tags so that everything works well in default formatting. Though, if you WOULD like to get the bulk of our CSS back without ditching the entire stylesheet, you should be able to achieve that using just a couple overrides:
div.storyblock.collapsed { height: auto; } div.expandermask { display: none; }
As for the last bit, yeah, I figure there's a way to probably make it work entirely via CSS with some creative use of :focus and :target -- I used some much simpler versions of those tricks on the Survival Fund site -- so I'm definitely keeping that in mind.
On the post: Tim Berners-Lee Endorses DRM In HTML5, Offers Depressingly Weak Defense Of His Decision
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Tim Berners-Lee Endorses DRM In HTML5, Offers Depressingly Weak Defense Of His Decision
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Javascript sealed away in a tomb
On the post: Tim Berners-Lee Endorses DRM In HTML5, Offers Depressingly Weak Defense Of His Decision
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Javascript sealed away in a tomb
But I did the best I could. I didn't bring the Foxycart javascript into our page, which is the "recommended" method and would have loaded up their entire API just for one product link (and would have turned the shopping cart into a JS-driven sidebar thing on the page, rather than a new URL).
As for what I had direct control over - the site itself - there are only two tiny bits of Javascript. One is for the quick 20/50/100/etc. links to choose donation amounts. The popup interface itself is all controlled via CSS, but there's no way at all to change the value of a form field based on a link click without JS, so it uses a quick two-line function to do that.
Even smaller is a bit of JS for the dialogue you get when returning to the page after donating (which you can see by adding #thanks to the url). Again the whole thing is CSS-driven (opening & closing done using the :target pseudoclass rather than any JS) but, because I personally hate when modal dialogues are *only* closeable by their "X" button but not by clicking somewhere outside the dialogue, I added one line of JS to close the modal on background click too (which couldn't, in any way I could figure out, be accomplished with pure CSS except perhaps by some very ugly and markup-heavy trickery).
On the post: Tim Berners-Lee Endorses DRM In HTML5, Offers Depressingly Weak Defense Of His Decision
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Javascript sealed away in a tomb
Collapsable sections would be a useful semantic/accessibility feature to standardize, so browsers could have uniform handling across sites.
This soooooort of exists now in the form of the HTML5 "summary" and "details" tags, though implementation is iffy and it's a long way from being usable for even slightly-complex functionality like our post expanders, sadly. Really that's because "collapsable" isn't especially semantic - many things that are very different in meaning might need to be collapsed in a user interface, and thus there is a "details" tag that does not really apply to "the body of a post".
On the post: Tim Berners-Lee Endorses DRM In HTML5, Offers Depressingly Weak Defense Of His Decision
Re: Re: Re: Re: Javascript sealed away in a tomb
When we built it we considered it very important to make sure it wouldn't just "degrade" but would not be required at all. The native page loads with static "Read More" links that point to the article page as normal; the JS, if executed, replaces those links with "Expand" buttons.
Of course, one of the flaws in the expanders (especially for those loading without JS) is that the full text of all the articles is loaded with the page right now, which is pretty inefficient for the majority of people who don't expand all of them (and completely useless for non-JS users). So we're strongly considering changing it in the future to only load snippets with the page, and request the rest of the post content dynamically on expanding.
On the post: Tim Berners-Lee Endorses DRM In HTML5, Offers Depressingly Weak Defense Of His Decision
Re: Re: Re: Javascript sealed away in a tomb
That said, I really really really like JS as a language. But I agree that treating simple websites as full-fledged apps running on massive frameworks is stupid and infuriating.
On the post: Soundcloud Tells Guy It Needs To Kill His Account Of 8 Years Because Someone Else Trademarked His Name
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: First come first serve
On the post: Soundcloud Tells Guy It Needs To Kill His Account Of 8 Years Because Someone Else Trademarked His Name
Re: Re: Re: First come first serve
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: this week
On the post: What Should We Add Next To The Techdirt Gear Store?
Re: Patents
How about something asinine drawn out in patent application style, with little figures and text descriptions.
I had been thinking about this general thing, but never really came up with a good specific idea. Also not sure how well I can replicate that technical drawing style - but, it's in the back of my brainstorming mind somewhere!
On the post: What Should We Add Next To The Techdirt Gear Store?
Re: Response to: That One Guy on Feb 25th, 2017 @ 5:18pm
On the post: What Should We Add Next To The Techdirt Gear Store?
Re: Sizes
Glad to know the shirts are good! There are a few different base shirt options we can choose from, but we've always stuck with one particular premium line that seemed like the best choice.
On the post: Why The DMCA's Notice & Takedown Already Has First Amendment Problems... And RIAA/MPAA Want To Make That Worse
Re:
On the post: Celebrate Fair Use Week With A New T-Shirt From Techdirt
Re: Tech De (Shopping) Cart
On the post: Order This Weekend To Get The Next Batch Of Techdirt Gear!
Re:
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: February 12th - 18th
Re:
At least 50% of the time when I write these with a billion old post tabs open, I manage to put the wrong year down somewhere. And about 10% of those times, I fail to catch it before publishing.
But so far you commenters have a 100% success rate on calling me out! :)
On the post: Techdirt Survival Fund: I Support Journalism
Re: Re: Re: Re: Donated - why do you need my address etc?
On the post: Techdirt Survival Fund: I Support Journalism
Re: Donated - why do you need my address etc?
Next >>