myfonj
Joined 13 years ago
Karma
1,713
Submissions
487
Member since
Jan 18
Recent submissions
Comment · 26 days ago
Turning off `browser.nova.enabled` to off in `about:config` also helps even without ext, not sure about for how long, though.
Comment · 1 month ago
Rounded corners and pill-shaped buttons really infest UI everywhere, and I never understood what kind of ergonomics they are supposed to improve.
And fighting them is increasingly difficult, but at least somewhat possible:
- VSC luckily still supports
workbench.experimental.modernUI
On the web, we can use userstyles sharpening most dulled corners [1]. And if you happen to have seen upcoming Firefox skin, it is also pill addict's fewer dream. We can use userChrome.css, but web components are making it very cumbersome and fragile, basically constantly adding new custom properties, being glad they are really used [2]. But I digress. I really look forward for this pill mania to wear off, like wet floors, glitters, and similar fads.
[1] https://userstyles.world/style/8283/
[2] https://gist.github.com/myfonj/f5415dd0580663a82ea18407ef2ee...
Comment · 1 month ago
"allways" (sic) feels quite 'normal' (as in very frequent for non-native speakers), but "regoqnition" (sic) is truly creative. Appreciated!
There is also "stulys" (sic), supposedly instead of "stylus". That seems almost deliberate…
Comment · 1 month ago
The "fifth" was probably from their essay <https://vale.rocks/micros/20260908-1315>, that was fourth on Lobsters (?)
> People often pair initial-scale=1 with overflow-x: hidden in their CSS […]
(That one in particular really seems like a strawman.)
Spotted under PPK's share <https://front-end.social/@ppk/117201706620768380>
Comment · 1 month ago
Ha, I stay corrected! Crawling back under rock to re-read WHATWG and historical W3C docs to fill the voids…
Note to self: Apparently, I mentally froze around 2009, so I have some decades to catch on. It seems the breaking point was after 2009 Hixie's WONFIX for adding keywords [0], at a time when both `keywords` and `description` were both swept aside into "MetaExtensions" [1]. The turning point I clearly missed came in 2010 [2] and got resolved through [3].
[0] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-bugzilla/20... [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20090205191845/http://wiki.whatw... [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/016... [3] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7525
Comment · 1 month ago
Well from the (incomplete, as turned out) info I gathered it turned out that it was never standardised to begin with (unlike meta description, for example), so it did not even have to be "deprecated". (Like it ever meant something in the real world…) I am definitely for any obsolete mischief, so it brings me joy hearing there is vernacular continuity!
(As for external search engines,FWIR, in its heyday some search engines briefly regarded it quite respectfully, but eventually due to SEO spam they either started to ignore it, or took it as a negative signal, allegedly. But as pointed out in sibling comment, it still survives in Yandex, what is quite surprising plot twist for me.)
Comment · 1 month ago
Ha! Last year I did some preliminary research, and all contemporary sources I've found agreed that last public search engine stopped supporting meta keywords around 2018, IIUC. So good catch about Yandex, thanks for the headsup! Funny, how things get complicated :) This meta had very turbulent history in 2010s and refuses to die, apparently.
Comment · 1 month ago
There is similar collection in the joshbuchea/HEAD project, in DEPRECATED.md [0].
(It reminds me to finally gather and record remaining info about
<meta name="keywords" content="...">
[0] https://github.com/joshbuchea/HEAD/blob/master/DEPRECATED.md
Comment · 2 months ago
> That seems rather dodgy.
I fully agree, yet in this particular case it probably holds, with possible exception of 2009 Safari, IIRC [1]. And absolutely agree that defensive @supports is better and more robust way to go. Just aimed to ameliorate the, from my point of view wrong and dangerous pattern using `color: transparent` the easiest possible "drop-in" that would encourage keeping the "normal" `color` intact and only introducing `-webkit-text-fill-color: transparent` on top of that. It seemed like a pattern (lazy) develoers would follow more likely
[1] https://github.com/mdn/content/issues/2638 Made some research while suggesting to promote better approach and point to caveats in the "authoritative" MDN article and partially succeeded. (Sadly, there are `color: transparent`s used in examples there now, but… at least I've tried.)
Comment · 2 months ago
Some caveats worth mentioning yet missing there:
1. many, MANY implementation bugs in `background-clip: text` across browsers, especially Firefox [1], basically safe only for simple cases with no additional transforms or filters.
2. `color: transparent` ensures the text will be invisible in every browser that does supports the `transparent` keyword (i.e. basically every single one, presumably) but not support background-clip:text yet, or fail to load or interpret the background-image (like in high contrast/forced colours mode). Use `-webit-text-fill-color: transparent` instead. (Yes, that vendor prefix is necessary, and yes, it is de-facto standardised and implemented in Chrome and Firefox [2]. And yes, it is as absurd as it gets.)
3. Touching the `letter-spacing` turns off all ligatures, logically. Could be a good thing, actually, but worth knowing. (Anthropic used to use negative letter-spacing thorough its webpages, but now it seems they abandoned that.)
[1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1656784 [2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Reference/P...
Comment · 4 months ago
I think that the domain knowledge still matters: if for nothing else, then at least it can make the communication both with savvy AI tools and savvy humans more effective compared to "outsiders": acquired vocabulary, truly grokked concepts in the field of target expertise etc… -- that all seem like a huge competitive advantage over folks having to learn all that "on the go", constantly struggling to pick the right nomenclature or using wrong or vague terms. It's mostly that domain knowledge what makes experts understand problems faster or at all, even.
Comment · 5 months ago
> Chasing enemies is much more annoying than them coming to you, so that would be a punishment to the player.
It seems I've failed to express myself clearly. The idea was that at some point, "low-level" adversaries simply stand no chance against a "high-level" PC, which should be obvious to both sides -- so acting accordingly on both sides would make sense without taking the fun out of the game, because -- and hear me out -- at that point in the game, chasing the low-level minions should be the last mechanic the player is forced to endure. When you are going for a dragon, you should not be forced to stomp your way past overly self-confident "newts" or mow down swarms of goblin youngsters…
Naturally, if the PC chooses to chase minions fleeing in terror after they took out the most courageous (or silly) third of their clan, that should be an option… and arguably it could even bring some satisfaction after the PC's low-level struggles, perhaps. But should this be the main mechanic? Definitely not -- at least not in the kind of game my thought experiment addressed.
Hate to participate on degradation of a foreign language with my ignorance. Trying my best not to do much harm as non-native speaker and never well taught and lazy person with zero practice (besides writing awkward comments). Do not hesitate to correct my mistakes:
[email protected]