Add customizable text footer to crossposted entries

[rosefox]

Title:
Add customizable text footer to crossposted entries

Area:
Crossposting

Summary:
I would like to see a footer in the text of my crossposted DW entries that (as much as possible) matches the footer on my LJ entries.

Description:
I would like each of my DW entries to have a footer in the entry text that says:

"This entry has been crossposted. Read it on [link]LiveJournal[/link]."

Ideally it should be as customizable as the footer that appears on the crossposted entries elsewhere (allowing the user to change what it says as well as the text style), and have the option for multiple links if the entry is crossposted to multiple sites. Having it appear in the text of the entry is important; showing the current link setup requires style modification (at least for those of us who use custom S2 styles) while having it in the text means it will show for everyone in every style.

To make it clearer, if you look at

http://rosefox.dreamwidth.org/1598852.html?format=light

the crosspost link is very obvious. But if you go to:

http://rosefox.dreamwidth.org/1598852.html

you can't see any info on the crossposts because it's a style object rather than part of the post text.

Poll #3462 Add footer to crossposted entries

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 35

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
10 (28.6%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
4 (11.4%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
9 (25.7%)

(I have no opinion)
12 (34.3%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Comments

[cesy]

I don't entirely understand this suggestion - what are you asking for that we don't already have? The option to have a link on the DW side was added recently.

[rosefox]

I'm asking for the link to be added to the text of the post, editable and formattable, rather than the current arrangement, where it's a separate object in the style.

[zvi]

I think it is a bad policy to have Dreamwidth automatically edit the text of entries, and I don't think we should get started on that path with this suggestion.

Additionally, a benefit of treating the crosspost link as an entry object is that, if you change the styling or text of the crosspost once, it should apply to all entries instantly.

What I do think we need is a better explanation of how to modify the crosspost object for people who are not using one of the official styles. I presume that this will happen as part of the S2 documentation push.

Additionally, I wish you would re-write this suggestion to clarify with the information that you gave Cesy. It is not the case that crosspost information isn't available on your entries now, or even that it isn't stylable. The information is there, and you would like a change in the way it's stored and presented, which is different.

[rosefox]

When I first made the post, I had no idea that it was there, because my style never showed it! I also read through some FAQ entries on crossposting and didn't see it. But now that I know it exists, I will edit the entry.

[rosefox]

Also, DW makes changes to the text of my crossposted entries, so why would I mind it making changes to the text of my stored-on-DW entries? There's no moral difference that I can see.

[rosefox]

Additionally, a benefit of treating the crosspost link as an entry object is that, if you change the styling or text of the crosspost once, it should apply to all entries instantly.

Thinking on this particular part further: I've seen a hundred different ways of changing the crosspost text that appears on LJ and other sites. Some people explain why they crosspost, some request comments on one site or the other, some just put their own unique stamp on it. I really enjoy seeing my friends' customizations of that text.

But if the DW-side crosspost link is only changeable through style settings, then my settings will override other people's, as happens with the "leave a comment" links.

So I guess this aspect of it comes down to the question of whether "this has been crossposted" is simply informational, like "there are n comments", and thus something that should be handled in one's style, or sufficiently subject to individualization that the post creator's preferences should be visible regardless of what style they're viewed in.

[zvi]

If my understanding of the way the information is stored in the database is correct (and it might not be) the crossposting text that appears on your notDW entry is still treated by the Dreamwidth database as a separate object from the entry.

You are, if I understand you correctly, asking Dreamwidth to create a template in your post, which will then be editable by you through the entry edit form but also by Dreamwidth's automatic crossposting software.

I am very wary of a situation where I and the software are fighting about what the actual text of the entry is, and it seems to me as if that is exactly what you are looking for. I think it's very easy to get

WRT whether or not a person's xpost text should be persistent across style changes, I do think that the text should be persistent, but it is possible for us to have style objects where that is true. I'm not sure if that's the case with this particular object.

[rosefox]

If my understanding of the way the information is stored in the database is correct (and it might not be) the crossposting text that appears on your notDW entry is still treated by the Dreamwidth database as a separate object from the entry.

That seems to be correct.

You are, if I understand you correctly, asking Dreamwidth to create a template in your post, which will then be editable by you through the entry edit form but also by Dreamwidth's automatic crossposting software.

I would prefer for it to work exactly the way the LJ version works: when I hit "post entry", generate some text and include it at the bottom of the entry, and after that let me edit it the way I edit any other text.

I suppose that to prevent crossposting infinite loop hilarity, the DW footer shouldn't even be different from the LJ footer, but should say something like: "Read this entry on [link]Dreamwidth[/link] (n comments), [link]LiveJournal[/link], or [link]InsaneJournal[/link]." That footer works for any version of the post on any site, will copy over properly if I edit the DW entry, etc.

[cheyinka]

But if the DW footer isn't different, one couldn't do something like "This post is a mirror of [post on Dreamwidth]; comments are disabled here, but anonymous commenting is permitted there." (At least not without clunky re-wording.)

[rosefox]

"I disable comments on [link]LJ[/link]; anon comments are welcome on [link]DW[/link]."

[rosefox]

(And thanks for helping me noodle through this!)

[noracharles]

Yes to having a textbox to enter custom crosspost footer text in. Yes to an explanation of how to insert the crosspost code in a custom style.

No to the rest of it. I've made crosspost info invisible in my style and I like it like that. I don't want dw inserting anything in my entries automatically, and I don't want other users inserting any kind of footer or sig line in their entries automatically. If they do, they should at least have the trouble of setting up an external client to do it.

[matgb]

I don't want other users inserting any kind of footer or sig line in their entries automatically. If they do, they should at least have the trouble of setting up an external client to do it.

So you want to prevent other people from being able to easily do things you personally dislike, out of personal preference?

Given that, as you've said, it can be easily hidden in style, what's wrong with having people be able to write what they want, in the same way we can for the entry that hits the other site from here? I use DW as a client for LJ, that allows me a custom footer on every LJ post that I can edit from here.

Why does DW let me do something on LJ but not let me do it here? What's that substantive difference?

[noracharles]

I like it that it can easily be hidden in style; the reason we can hide it in style is that it is a separate element. The OP suggested that it not be a separate element, but be part of the entry element.

Yes, I want dw to not facilitate content which is bad for accessibility, when there are more accessible options.

There is nothing wrong with dw letting us write what we want - I voted for a textbox to let us write what we want. I also don't have a problem with the element being editable on an entry by entry basis, like mood is.

When we crosspost to lj from dw, dw acts as a client. I've also seen entries on dw crossposted from other places with a crosspost footer. The substantive difference is that I choose to read the version crossposted to dreamwidth from wordpress (for example) because it is more convenient for me, and I'm willing to accept an inferior copy for the convenience of having all my feeds and subscriptions on one reading page.

But having an automatic footer text as part of the entry would mean a less accessible original copy for no very compelling reason. I've been to notice board forums, I hate sig lines based on experience not prejudice.

[delladea]

I like the idea of being able to customize the text label displayed for the crosspost.

The crosspost link itself should remain a separate entity from the journal entry. These links describe your journal entry, and are not a part of it and should not be included in the entry body.

[kerravonsen]

+1

[kyrielle]

+1. Including them in the entry body on the other site is, IMO, a workaround to the structure of the other site and not a feature.

[stasha2g]

+1