As it's a simple CSS hack, nothing would be revealed except what each user of your DW already has access to. In yet another version of CSS I'm running for this, I've restricted visible access to the security levels of each tag to .logged-in .has-access only, which means you can't even see that the public tags are marked "(public)" on my journal unless 1) you're logged into DW and 2) I have already granted you access to the access-only-posts on my journal.
There are a many ways, thanks to the sheer amount of granular HTML classes DW gives us to work with (.subscribed, .has-access,.no-access, etc.) to code the CSS for this idea to accomplish one of five things:
1) you can write the code so that the public and your subscribers (logged-out DW users, non-DW users, and logged-in DW users who subscribe whom you have not granted access to) can see the word "(public)" alongside already-publicly visible tags, but they can't see any other access-restricted tags on your journal (because user CSS can't make already access-restricted tags visible to people without the proper access - that's controlled though other, non-CSS forms of code used on DW) 2) you can restrict the above behavior to just your subscribers 3) you can restrict the above behavior to just your access-list 4) or you can combine 2) and 3) 5) or hell, you can just code this so everyone who can see your journal at all can see what access-level each tag has based on what access level you have granted each person who sees it (and yes, this is basically the same as option 1) but now I'm making it more granular so every access level out there can see a visible security level next to each tag they're already allowed to see - option 1) was really just me laying the whole idea out for you)
Does that make sense?
No matter how you choose to roll the code up in the end, it's basically impossible to crack it to breach someone's privacy since it's CSS-based only. (The JavaScript I mentioned in the OP? That's just to turn it on in your DW if it becomes an opt-in option instead of the default).
no subject
.logged-in .has-accessonly, which means you can't even see that the public tags are marked "(public)" on my journal unless 1) you're logged into DW and 2) I have already granted you access to the access-only-posts on my journal.There are a many ways, thanks to the sheer amount of granular HTML classes DW gives us to work with (
.subscribed, .has-access,.no-access, etc.) to code the CSS for this idea to accomplish one of five things:1) you can write the code so that the public and your subscribers (logged-out DW users, non-DW users, and logged-in DW users who subscribe whom you have not granted access to) can see the word "(public)" alongside already-publicly visible tags, but they can't see any other access-restricted tags on your journal (because user CSS can't make already access-restricted tags visible to people without the proper access - that's controlled though other, non-CSS forms of code used on DW)
2) you can restrict the above behavior to just your subscribers
3) you can restrict the above behavior to just your access-list
4) or you can combine 2) and 3)
5) or hell, you can just code this so everyone who can see your journal at all can see what access-level each tag has based on what access level you have granted each person who sees it (and yes, this is basically the same as option 1) but now I'm making it more granular so every access level out there can see a visible security level next to each tag they're already allowed to see - option 1) was really just me laying the whole idea out for you)
Does that make sense?
No matter how you choose to roll the code up in the end, it's basically impossible to crack it to breach someone's privacy since it's CSS-based only. (The JavaScript I mentioned in the OP? That's just to turn it on in your DW if it becomes an opt-in option instead of the default).