marahmarie: my initials (MM) (Default)
MM Writes ([personal profile] marahmarie) wrote in [site community profile] dw_suggestions2012-09-26 12:41 am

Add the ability for logged-in users to visibly sort the Tags Page by access level.

Title:
Add the ability for logged-in users to visibly sort the Tags Page by access level.

Area:
Styles

Summary:
There is currently a hidden feature on the Visible Tags Page: the ability to show the approximate access-level assigned to each tag. I would like DW to add CSS or a combination of JavaScript and CSS to all our journals to show the hidden feature to everyone who opts-in.

Description:
Currently the Visible Tags page shows all your tags in a single, alphabetically sorted list but does not *visibly* indicate which tags are used on private, access-list-only or public posts. So one day about a year ago I asked myself, "Why not?" and wound up writing CSS that exposed the access-level of all my private and access-list-only posts. This became a fantastic sorting system since I have no other way to tell what I've thrown where without using the Manage Tags page, which can be kind of awkward and time-consuming.

So a week ago I took this a little further and refined the CSS so that 1) only logged-in users see the access-levels alongside each tag and 2) logged-in users see the exact access level used on each tag - public, private, or access-list-only. Here's a screen cap of my current Visible Tags page using my latest CSS for it (logged-in view - logged-out you won't see any of the extra information shown in this screen cap):
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll128/marahstest/expose_access-level_tags_page.jpg

What I'm humbly hoping for is this system of sorting tags by access-level, as seen in the screen cap, gets adapted site-wide either as the default view on the Visible Tags page (of course, it will be visible to logged-in users by access-level only) or else becomes an opt-in default option (which is where JavaScript would probably come into play; otherwise, this is a pure CSS hack).

There are a few possible issues with adapting this styling: 1) it may take more firepower to serve up the additional CSS (but I'm thinking it would not be enough to crash servers or do anything that dramatic as things stand; it's just hard to calculate how much this might slow things down without knowing how much firepower DW has to spare) and 2) there is currently an issue where if you use a tag at more than one access level (say you use your "cats" tag both publicly and on several access-list-only posts) it will get an HTML tag indicating it's for public use only, which means DW won't be able to style it with the specific CSS to reflect that you used it three times publicly and three times for access list readers. Until that split-usage quirk is fixed, my idea makes for an imprecise-at-best look at how your tags are being used. But I think it's still better than not having any sorting system in place at all; in the meantime you can still use your Manage Tags page to drill down more precisely.

If this were to get adopted, I could see future improvements to it such as sorting tags by access level on the Visible Tags Page instead of sorting them entirely alphabetically as we do now, adding the ability to style each access level separately, and so on.

Poll #11751 Add the ability for logged-in users to visibly sort the Tags Page by access level.
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 47


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
15 (31.9%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
3 (6.4%)

(I have no opinion)
28 (59.6%)

(Other: please comment)
1 (2.1%)

[personal profile] swaldman 2012-09-28 12:42 pm (UTC)(link)
Note that it's already possible for somebody to use CSS or a style layer to do this (as Marahmarie has done) - but it's probably a minority of users who have the knowhow to do it themselves.

I think that there are two seperate questions here:

1. Should the visibility level of tags be shown by default (as suggested)
2. Should there be a UI option to vary this default

I have no strong opinion on (1), and a minor aversion to (2).



It seems like something that would sit really nicely in some sort of gallery of style layers that just change individual things ("snippets"), that people could contribute to and others could use... that's way outside scope, though, and I've no idea whether there's a plan for such a thing :-)
kyrielle: A photo of kyrielle, in profile, turned slightly toward the viewer (Default)

[personal profile] kyrielle 2012-09-28 01:35 pm (UTC)(link)
My gut reaction is that I have an aversion to #1 as well - but I'm not sure it's a legitimate aversion. My issue is if someone looks at the tag and sees, as noted, its MOST public usage of the tag (is the tag public? yes it is. it's public because it's on at least one public post) and assumes that means things tagged with it are common knowledge (just because it's on public posts doesn't mean it's ONLY on public posts).

I think the tag level reflecting that the *tag* is public (which it is) rather than the number of posts under it that are public, is appropriate. But I don't want people to make assumptions.

That said, they COULD just click the tag and look at the posts, see the top one is public, and assume they all are. It's not like this exposes any information or allows any assumptions someone couldn't already make if they wanted to, even without knowing how to re-style the page to see it.

[personal profile] swaldman 2012-09-29 07:49 am (UTC)(link)
I was averse to 2 because I didn't especially like the idea of adding more options to an already option-laden system. Having said that, it occurs to me this morning that this option might fit best in the style customization screens, which are already so full of confusing options that I'm not sure I care very much ;-) In which case, it would be nice to let people who don't code have the choice.

[personal profile] swaldman 2012-09-29 07:53 am (UTC)(link)
it would be 1) a major re-write of existing code, thus hard, time-consuming, and expensive to pull off

Nope, it would be quite easy to do - and in fact can already be done by anybody who has the knowhow to write their own style layer.
mokie: Earthrise seen from the moon (Default)

[personal profile] mokie 2012-09-29 10:27 am (UTC)(link)
This is what awaits me when I open the tag page on my LJ, and I miss it on other sites.

View tag access
cesy: "Cesy" - An old-fashioned quill and ink (Default)

[personal profile] cesy 2012-09-29 05:06 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm not sure exactly what I want, but having some of this information more easily visible would be good, so long as it doesn't reveal anything that's not already available to the person in question.
mokie: Earthrise seen from the moon (Default)

[personal profile] mokie 2012-09-30 01:38 am (UTC)(link)
This is under Smooth Sailing, which I also love for its many free text boxes, but I think most styles now are just the list, or the option of list/multi-level list/cloud. Having the info on the tag page itself is so useful for me, though, that I wish they all offered the option.

So an enthusiastic YES! from me for this suggestion. :)

[ETA] As per cesy's comment: the style in the posted screencap is a mixed bag on privacy.

If you were to look at my LJ tags page (you can, if you'd like--it's the same username), you'd not see any tags used only on locked or private entries. If a tag is used on a mix of open and locked/private entries, though, the table does give you that information. For instance, both "private" (only me) and "under the cone of silence" (only friends) are invisible to me when I'm logged out. But I can still see that "aha!" (mixed public/friends) is used on one locked entry.

It's not much of an issue for me, but I imagine it might be for others.
Edited (I also fail at basic HTML.) 2012-09-30 02:01 (UTC)
denise: Image: Me, facing away from camera, on top of the Castel Sant'Angelo in Rome (Default)

[staff profile] denise 2012-09-30 01:47 am (UTC)(link)
You guys aren't expected to try to figure that out. If it'll be a problem, we'll tell you.
mokie: Earthrise seen from the moon (Default)

[personal profile] mokie 2012-09-30 02:44 am (UTC)(link)
Didn't mean to be unclear here. I wasn't saying your suggestion should or shouldn't work a certain way. I pointed out a style at LJ that does something similar to your suggestion in case it's helpful in developing said suggestion, and followed up with a description of how that LJ style works regarding privacy, again in case it's helpful in developing this suggestion here. So it's Smooth Sailing that's the mixed bag, telling folks that you've used certain tags in entries they can't access.

(Screencap was also referring to that Smooth Sailing image.)
cheyinka: A glowing blue sheep with green eyes (electric sheep)

[personal profile] cheyinka 2012-09-30 03:30 am (UTC)(link)
""But I can still see that "aha!" (mixed public/friends) is used on one locked entry."
But that's not a privacy issue. Anything the public can see, your friends can see, too. :)"

I think you've got it backwards - it's not that a friend can see both "aha!" entries, but that looking at that page logged out, right now, I can see that there is an "aha!" entry I can't see, because I'm not on [livejournal.com profile] mokie's reading list. Normally, unless I'm linked to a locked entry, or I notice that the last-posted time on the profile is later than the latest entry I can see, there's no way for me to know that someone has posted an entry I can't see.
mokie: Earthrise seen from the moon (Default)

[personal profile] mokie 2012-09-30 04:51 am (UTC)(link)
No worries! It was pure lack of caffeine on my part--I saw a second after posting that you'd already answered that. :)
cheyinka: A glowing blue sheep with green eyes (electric sheep)

[personal profile] cheyinka 2012-09-30 11:10 pm (UTC)(link)
Somehow I missed your reply, oops! Sorry :)
ciaan: revolution (Default)

[personal profile] ciaan 2012-11-30 03:10 pm (UTC)(link)
I think I'm against the idea of anyone but me seeing what access levels are assigned to my tags. But giving more detailed info to me, that I am for.