List Items unstyled in various portions of OCAL

Reported by Brad Phillips on 2011-02-15
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
openclipart
Low
rejon

Bug Description

I noticed, when making a new page (/packages-presidents) that certain elements on the page that had been styled in previous instances of similar pages were no longer styled. Mainly, the images that are list items seem to default to basic list-item styles.

For current examples of this, see any clip art's detail page. I assume this is related to the css overhaul that is taking place. Solution is to place "list-style: none;" in the global css files on ocal so that each <li></li> element won't default to basic styles.

I disagree on the solution. That was what it was originally and it
interfered with many textual lists that are on the site (which would then
have to be specified every single time.) Instead of making all lists the
same, I would like them to be specified/styled by id or class into the
relevant ul li css that is now there. It is in the main widget, css section.

Global styles don't work properly, as in the way we do it caches old css and
mucks up the css editing we do. Had a hangover of a time trying to figure
out why my realtime css edits wasn't being applied to the site, and "Where
the heck is this source css coming from?? I've removed it from there
already!".

I don't think images that are buttons or such should be used as li. There
are better ways to achieve the same look without using informational
structure as a display tool. The exception to this is the nav menu, as that
actually MAKES it a link list when unstyled. To tie in other pictures into
li format for layout is not using css properly. Lists are for words/data -
not making things line up because it's easier than good css.

I'm an advocate of separation of style and content and cross-browser
compatability, and also accessability. OCAL needs to do better than in the
past.

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Brad Phillips <email address hidden>wrote:

> Public bug reported:
>
> I noticed, when making a new page (/packages-presidents) that certain
> elements on the page that had been styled in previous instances of
> similar pages were no longer styled. Mainly, the images that are list
> items seem to default to basic list-item styles.
>
> For current examples of this, see any clip art's detail page. I assume
> this is related to the css overhaul that is taking place. Solution is
> to place "list-style: none;" in the global css files on ocal so that
> each <li></li> element won't default to basic styles.
>
> ** Affects: openclipart
> Importance: Low
> Status: New
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of
> openclipart.devel, which is subscribed to openclipart.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719544
>
> Title:
> List Items unstyled in various portions of OCAL
>
> Status in openclipart:
> New
>
> Bug description:
> I noticed, when making a new page (/packages-presidents) that certain
> elements on the page that had been styled in previous instances of
> similar pages were no longer styled. Mainly, the images that are list
> items seem to default to basic list-item styles.
>
> For current examples of this, see any clip art's detail page. I
> assume this is related to the css overhaul that is taking place.
> Solution is to place "list-style: none;" in the global css files on
> ocal so that each <li></li> element won't default to basic styles.
>
>
>

--
Cheers
Chovynz

rejon (rejon) on 2011-02-15
Changed in openclipart:
assignee: nobody → rejon (rejon)
milestone: 3.0 → 2.9
status: New → Triaged
rejon (rejon) on 2011-02-15
Changed in openclipart:
status: Triaged → Fix Released
chovynz (chovynz) wrote :

No, you broke the css, because you didn't see my "against" email.
ul and il can't be globally "list-style:none"-ed.
See http://www.openclipart.org/sitemap for one reason why.
There are plenty of Word lists on OCAL that need default listing - and many more to come with all the wiki info you want on the site.
It's not good css to be doing manual fixes everytime.

Please use the css provided. All you need to do is add the id to the ul li that has list style none, not make all ul il as none.
Make sense?

Changed in openclipart:
status: Fix Released → Incomplete
chovynz (chovynz) wrote :

All you need to do is add the id to the ul li that has list style none, not make all ul il as none.

Or class if there is one on the widget. (preffered option, incase the ID changes but css doesn't get updated.)

css warz

On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:15 PM, chovynz <email address hidden> wrote:
> All you need to do is add the id to the ul li that has list style none,
> not make all ul il as none.
>
> Or class if there is one on the widget. (preffered option, incase the ID
> changes but css doesn't get updated.)
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are a bug assignee.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719544
>
> Title:
>  List Items unstyled in various portions of OCAL
>

--
Jon Phillips
http://rejon.org/ | http://fabricatorz.com/
chat/skype: kidproto | irc: rejon
+1.415.830.3884 (global) | +1-510-499-0894 (sf)

chovynz (chovynz) wrote :

it is! lol. Not your fault.
I saw it coming before I started the css cleanup.

However, I think ocal as a whole needs to cleanup their css act.
My hope is to make things easier so that we don't have to keep specifying default behaviours each time we create a widget.
Should be able to just make a widget and have it work how it's intended. (e.g. lists displayed as lists, with list heirarchy.)

What we need to do is find the patterns of natural usage and go with them instead of making more work for every one. This is especially more important when we have 7+ developers making widgets for OCAL.

When I make a list, I want it to look and behave like a list. I don't want to have to style it to make it do the list thing as well. That's unecessary coding, and a waste of everyones time.

If someone wants to do one list item, without the bullets, then they should add that class or id to the div#ul li that I have created which specifies list-style:none. It's silly to make all lists have no bullets, when that is what they are designed for. The exception to this is the nav bar link list, as when it is unstyled it IS a list. That should be the only exception.

Chovynz, default styling is bad because you're not in control of how the content is displayed. Browsers don't agree what default styles mean. When I'm working on a site, I'll nearly always add a stylesheet just to eliminate default styles, and this is a widely used & common practice.

The programmer should have explicit control over how their content is displayed. Also, currently, it's more work to undo the messed up lists than it is to add default styling to your pages, if that's the way you want to control your content (but again, I don't recommend this practice).

chovynz (chovynz) wrote :
Download full text (4.2 KiB)

A list is a list. That doesn't change in browsers. I don't do this practise
for every site - but it suits OCAL's membership and workflow.

Default styling is good for making lists appear as lists. A list shouldn't
be removed from being a list. A list looking like a list without any extra
work is good practise. Removing the function of a list from making it look
like a not list, so that you have to make the list styled, just to look like
a list is bad practise.

We are saying the same thing. Just the method of getting there is different.

If you do want to remove ul il bullets and spaces (as it was css spaghetti
code before) then give me another option for when I make a
<ul>
<li> list item

that I want to appear as a list, without any further work. I'd like any list
I do in writing to appear with bullets, with heirarchy. If you can achieve
that, fine, lets do that. Not adding any further coding is necessary, as we
may have people editing the website text, that don't know any css.

Keep it simple. Simple to make, simple to do. I agree with your normal
practise, but that's for only one person on a site usually, where that one
person can control the stuff. (Not that I agree with the programmer has to
have explicit control either. But that's another story.)

Here, we are talking us developers, + the librarians (and at a later date +
every registered user) who can make lists. If they have to resort to css
coding to make a list look like a list, that is not user-friendly at all.

Perhaps not consciously; you're making an assumption that anyone who works
on the content will actually know how to make a css list - this is an
invalid assumption and not good for encouraging anyone to become a
librarian. I'm trying to get more people to become librarians. If they want
to do css work then they become a developer, those people are the ones who
can do css, much easier than librarians.

Do more work now, so that there's less work later. I don't want to have to
visit this css issue again in the future because we haven't agreed on the
way forward. I'm thinking of having it as simple as possible, for everyone
to be able to create a bulleted list with heirarchy, by separation of
presentation and styling. Once that has been achieved. Then Librarians only
need to know a little html - nothing else.

Right now, Librarians have to know html, AND css, and if they really want to
be useful, sql, php, aiki, and so on. I'm trying to make it as simple as
possible for a librarian to be able to make pages and text. Yes, if they
know css that's great, but if they don't, then there is another job that is
forced on someone else.

CSS work is for Developers. It's not for Librarians. Let's keep it that way
by default instead of the other way around.

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Brad Phillips
<email address hidden>wrote:

> Chovynz, default styling is bad because you're not in control of how the
> content is displayed. Browsers don't agree what default styles mean.
> When I'm working on a site, I'll nearly always add a stylesheet just to
> eliminate default styles, and this is a widely used & common practice.
>
> The programmer should have explicit control over how the...

Read more...

Disagreed on nearly all of that. If a developer knows enough to use a list-item or any other html element, then they should know how to style one. Saying that html elements are supposed to look a certain way is incorrect & that's how bad styling practice like reliance on tables is propagated. Also, if you're serious about advocating separation of style and content (which I agree with), reliance on any default styling is incorrect.

For the site design as a whole, the css should be killed of default styles & html elements should be styled by designers (not by browsers). In areas where Librarians have control of content, developers can easily add classes & rules to control what they insert. Opening the floodgates to bad and reliant code is not the solution.

Changed in openclipart:
status: Incomplete → Fix Released
chovynz (chovynz) wrote :
Download full text (4.6 KiB)

I don't really care how it's achieved, as long as I as a librarian can type
in

<ul>
  <li> parent item </il>
  <ul>
    <li> child item </il>
  </ul>
</ul>

And have it work as it is supposed to. This is good coding. It's simple. It
doesn't rely on anything else. It's accessible by anything, and anyone can
do it. That is basic html. This is the most simple it can get for any person
to make a list.

The way you are going about (and forcing me to do, and others) is to declare
extra styling so that my list looks like a list. It is you guys who are
using the reliance on ul li in the nav and other places, that is incorrect.
It's bad for useabilty, bad for scalability. It's bad for when styling is
not turned on. It's difficult for a librarian (who might be a damn good
spell checker, but sucky at css) to be able to make a list, when they don't
know how to. OCAL shouldn't force librarians to learn how to make css lists,
just because you have removed the *normal functionality *of an html list.
This is bad coding and bad css practise, and bad for useability.

You said a very key point in your reply, which I want to address. "If a
developer knows enough to use a list-item or any other html element, then
they should know how to style one". A developer. Your focus is on
developers. You assume that a developer should know how to style one. Why
make any assumption at all? My focus is and always has been on* librarians
and how the site is used by a non-programmer*. If it is not useable, then it
needs to be simplified. You cannot expect people, whether they are
librarians, developers or just joe blogs, to be able to code in anyway shape
or form. I assume that they know nothing about css or coding. I also assume
that they dont want to learn about that. The solution for allowing a list
made by anyone is easy to work around, but it takes deeper thinking than
just, "I can do it, so can anyone else."

Lowest common denominator. Simplify. Easy for anyone. That is my approach
and has always been. Stop forcing everyone to think like a programmer (most
of whom disagree about how to do something anyway). If my
grandmother-librarian cannot do librarian job (she is not computer savvy and
wouldn't know the slightest thing about css) of making a list, then we need
to make it easy for her to make one. Not force her to learn something that
she doesn't want to do. That thinking turns people off becoming a librarian
because it's daunting and arrogant.

If you can code the css so that anyone can do this:
<ul>
  <li> parent item </il>
  <ul>
    <li> child item </il>
  </ul>
</ul>
Then please do so. I don't know how to - other than leaving the css as
default behaviour. I do know how to code the css so that specific ul li's
can have what they need. In this case, add each specific ul li ID or CLASS
to the relevant css list-style:none. Not by doing a blanket "All lists get
no bullets and no margin."

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Brad Phillips <email address hidden>wrote:

> Disagreed on nearly all of that. If a developer knows enough to use a
> list-item or any other html element, then they should know how to style
> one. Saying that html elements are supposed to look...

Read more...

chovynz (chovynz) wrote :
Download full text (5.4 KiB)

I should mention here that I'm not trying to make it dumb for everyone. I'm
trying to make becoming a librarian as accesible to anyone as possible, no
matter their skill level.

For those of us who do know how to css.html.code etc, this won't change a
thing. We can still produce fantastic results via what we know. But for
those people who have none or little skill, they still need to be able to
make a list look like a list.

The only other way I can think of achieving this, is by making a WYSISYG
type librarian editor styling. That's not a route I want to go down just
yet. (Someone else can if they have the skills and time, but I don't)

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:20 PM, chovynz <email address hidden> wrote:

> I don't really care how it's achieved, as long as I as a librarian can type
> in
>
> <ul>
> <li> parent item </il>
> <ul>
> <li> child item </il>
> </ul>
> </ul>
>
> And have it work as it is supposed to. This is good coding. It's simple. It
> doesn't rely on anything else. It's accessible by anything, and anyone can
> do it. That is basic html. This is the most simple it can get for any person
> to make a list.
>
> The way you are going about (and forcing me to do, and others) is to
> declare extra styling so that my list looks like a list. It is you guys who
> are using the reliance on ul li in the nav and other places, that is
> incorrect. It's bad for useabilty, bad for scalability. It's bad for when
> styling is not turned on. It's difficult for a librarian (who might be a
> damn good spell checker, but sucky at css) to be able to make a list, when
> they don't know how to. OCAL shouldn't force librarians to learn how to make
> css lists, just because you have removed the *normal functionality *of an
> html list. This is bad coding and bad css practise, and bad for useability.
>
> You said a very key point in your reply, which I want to address. "If a
> developer knows enough to use a list-item or any other html element, then
> they should know how to style one". A developer. Your focus is on
> developers. You assume that a developer should know how to style one. Why
> make any assumption at all? My focus is and always has been on* librarians
> and how the site is used by a non-programmer*. If it is not useable, then
> it needs to be simplified. You cannot expect people, whether they are
> librarians, developers or just joe blogs, to be able to code in anyway shape
> or form. I assume that they know nothing about css or coding. I also assume
> that they dont want to learn about that. The solution for allowing a list
> made by anyone is easy to work around, but it takes deeper thinking than
> just, "I can do it, so can anyone else."
>
> Lowest common denominator. Simplify. Easy for anyone. That is my approach
> and has always been. Stop forcing everyone to think like a programmer (most
> of whom disagree about how to do something anyway). If my
> grandmother-librarian cannot do librarian job (she is not computer savvy and
> wouldn't know the slightest thing about css) of making a list, then we need
> to make it easy for her to make one. Not force her to learn something that
> she doesn't want to do. That thinking turns people...

Read more...

A "list" doesn't look like anything unless you tell it to look a certain way. If you don't tell it to look like anything, then the browser decides for you. This is bad practice for anyone designing a website.

I didn't see any 'default' list styling until you started creating pages, so I would argue that default lists don't fit the overall design aesthetic of ocal, in the first place.

I'm not forcing anyone to think like a developer, just asserting what is best practice for a website design, on a large scale. If you don't know how to do something, file a bug where it can be addressed. Controlling LIbrarian input is doable in a way that fits best web standards & practices & doesn't break the rest of the site at the same time.

rejon (rejon) wrote :

You guys are crazy. Spend more time hacking and less time talking! :)
Time to close this out and fix the site rather than wax nobs. ;)

Jon

chovynz (chovynz) wrote :

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Brad Phillips <email address hidden>wrote:

> A "list" doesn't look like anything unless you tell it to look a certain
> way. If you don't tell it to look like anything, then the browser
> decides for you. This is bad practice for anyone designing a website.
>
Unless you want wordy lists, and other lists.

>
> I didn't see any 'default' list styling until you started creating
> pages, so I would argue that default lists don't fit the overall design
> aesthetic of ocal, in the first place.
>
Yep. I didn't start doing this until Jon decided on moving the entire wiki
information over to OCAL.
Now it's an issue that has come up, one I spent alot of time on "fixing"
because it was broken in the first place. Or rather and more to the point,
the original way we were doing ALL lists, doesn't allow for the text lists
that are a necessary part of text documents.

> I'm not forcing anyone to think like a developer, just asserting what is
> best practice for a website design, on a large scale. If you don't know
> how to do something, file a bug where it can be addressed. Controlling
> LIbrarian input is doable in a way that fits best web standards &
> practices & doesn't break the rest of the site at the same time.
>
We are still saying the same thing.
Having text lists appear as bulleted text heriarchial lists is how it's
supposed to be, and browsers do that correctly. The issue and differences in
ways of coding appears when we have lists doing different things, or trying
to make lists do things they weren't designed for.

There needs to be two separate ul li declarations, one for normal texts, and
one for the other (legitimate) uses, like nav bars.

However, why on earth is the upload button a list item? It doesn't need to
be in the first place. Structurally, the html is wrong. That is what I'm
saying. The css is (well, was) correct, the html structure needs to change.
That is something I didn't get around to during the big css cleanup. I spent
3 actual days finding out where the css was applying things, and how to
simplify it, so that the css works for both textual lists, and image/other
lists.

Sorry about my reaction. It wasn't needed.

Am I making better sense now?

>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of
> openclipart.devel, which is subscribed to openclipart.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719544
>
> Title:
> List Items unstyled in various portions of OCAL
>
> Status in openclipart:
> Fix Released
>
> Bug description:
> I noticed, when making a new page (/packages-presidents) that certain
> elements on the page that had been styled in previous instances of
> similar pages were no longer styled. Mainly, the images that are list
> items seem to default to basic list-item styles.
>
> For current examples of this, see any clip art's detail page. I
> assume this is related to the css overhaul that is taking place.
> Solution is to place "list-style: none;" in the global css files on
> ocal so that each <li></li> element won't default to basic styles.
>
>
>

--
Cheers
Chovynz

chovynz (chovynz) wrote :

Talking helps to make things go in the same direction. Talking is good. Need
more talkie. :)
We are both passionate about web standards and good design. Brad knows what
he's talking about.
But so do I. Maybe I don't put it across well, but I know useability when I
see it.

Mucho Respecto Brad.

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:53 PM, rejon <email address hidden> wrote:

> You guys are crazy. Spend more time hacking and less time talking! :)
> Time to close this out and fix the site rather than wax nobs. ;)
>
> Jon
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of
> openclipart.devel, which is subscribed to openclipart.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/719544
>
> Title:
> List Items unstyled in various portions of OCAL
>
> Status in openclipart:
> Fix Released
>
> Bug description:
> I noticed, when making a new page (/packages-presidents) that certain
> elements on the page that had been styled in previous instances of
> similar pages were no longer styled. Mainly, the images that are list
> items seem to default to basic list-item styles.
>
> For current examples of this, see any clip art's detail page. I
> assume this is related to the css overhaul that is taking place.
> Solution is to place "list-style: none;" in the global css files on
> ocal so that each <li></li> element won't default to basic styles.
>
>
>

--
Cheers
Chovynz

I disagree with bullets being a "supposed to" for a list item, or any styling automatically applied to any item on a page. All of the visual elements on a page should be visually styled and addressed by ocal designers, not left for browsers to assume what something should look like. I understand your sentiment, but I feel strongly that it's an incorrect way of going about it, and I'm just trying to make sure you understand why it's bad, so that OCAL is pushed in the proper directions.

I don't think changing html structure is necessary either, especially for styling purposes. They should be separate beasts. All html does is group elements together, whether it's a list item or a div or a span or anything else.

Chovynz, I think best place to start is to file a bug describing what you want to happen on your Librarian-created stuff, like "hey, list-items on these pages aren't styled in the way I think they should be."

We all appreciate the work you're doing, Chovynz. Jon is right, however, solution time & not text blurbs & this bug is fixed.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers