What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 133 Stack Exchange communities.

Since Adobe tags (which I'm totally not interested in) now are screaming for attention with colorful icons, I tried to add them to my ignored tags. They are added to the ignored list, but the questions containing them are not actually displayed with the changed style. (Example: "actionscript")

Directly after adding a tag it seems to work, but after a reload questions with the tag stop being marked as ignored.

share|improve this question
5  
Oh no. Colorful icons. It's the end of the world... –  Luke Sep 30 '09 at 6:34
7  
Well, I understand that you like them as red markers next to your favorite tags. If these tags would be my favorites I would also like them. But since I don't know anything about flash/... and also have no interest in learning about it they merely distracts me from more interesting things. –  sth Sep 30 '09 at 7:01
1  
Sure. I understand that. How about this. The construction of this website takes a lot of time, effort and therefore money. You can use it totally for free, no obligations what so ever. Would it be possible for you to put up with a couple of "colorful icons" next to your tags in return? Or is it something you really need to complain about? –  Luke Oct 1 '09 at 0:18
2  
@Luke: Well, how about this: Adding and updating the content on this site takes a lot of time and effort. They get it from us (the community) totally for free, no obligations what so ever. would it be possible for them to let us disable those "colorful icons" next to our tags in return? Or is this something that really needs to be "in our face" all the time? –  fretje Oct 1 '09 at 8:51

5 Answers 5

up vote 17 down vote accepted

This is fixed and will be rolled out in tomorrow's push.

The new image added a space when jQuery's .text() was called, so I wrapped that call in a $.trim.

I <3 jQuery!

share|improve this answer
    
Hoorah for upset citizens! –  random Sep 30 '09 at 8:32
1  
It looks like my timing is as good as always –  Rich Seller Sep 30 '09 at 8:33
1  
@Jarrod: it's still not working. I have flash ignored, but still see flash questions. –  user27414 Oct 2 '09 at 16:35
1  
It's still not working for me - Oct 6th. –  Matt Lacey Oct 6 '09 at 10:06
    
Yeah still not working for me either. –  Matt Hamilton Oct 13 '09 at 23:27
    
What browsers is the ignored functionality not working in? –  Jarrod Dixon Oct 14 '09 at 0:10
    
Of course - it would have to be IE - shakes fist –  Jarrod Dixon Oct 14 '09 at 0:15
    
dev.jquery.com/ticket/2690 - IE doesn't include &nbsp; in its regex matching for \s - I guess we go with a work-around until jQuery fixes that bug. –  Jarrod Dixon Oct 14 '09 at 0:46
    
Actually, I got rid of the underlying issue - next push will fix this for all browsers. –  Jarrod Dixon Oct 14 '09 at 1:25
    
@Jarrod - Check my answer on this question, I made a slightly more streamlined version of that whole function. –  gnarf Jan 23 '10 at 1:38

Edit: workaround, use wildcards. Remember that the extra space at the start is blocking the match, so enter *flash to block flash, *actionscript-3 etc.

share|improve this answer
2  
Nice. It also makes the icon go away in the list of ignored tags. Is there a description of the syntax somewhere? –  starblue Sep 30 '09 at 8:36

It looks like the bug is in the getTagsSelector() function, when the text is obtained for tags with embedded images there is a leading space, resulting in a class of ".t- flex" (rather than ".t-flex", I threw together a GreaseMonkey script to test removing the space and it seems to work.

i.e. replace:

if(d){
    b+="div.tags:regex(class, t-"+a.replace(/\*/g,".*")+"),"
} else{
    b+="div.t-"+a+","
}

with:

if(d){
    b+="div.tags:regex(class, t-"+a.replace(/\*/g,".*")+"),"
} else{
    b+="div.t-"+a.substring(1)+","
}

There is probably a neater way

share|improve this answer

If it's part of the ad terms/contract to have the tag not hidden even if it's listed on a user's ignore list, it's branding and advertising to an uninterested crowd.

Which is missing the point of the ignore/hidden tags. If they have no interest in seeing the tags, why would they now want to see the tag with sponsorship?

Forces it down the throat of the wrong market. The targeting has failed in this case.

share|improve this answer
4  
"If it's part of the ad terms/contract to have the tag not hidden even if it's listed on a user's ignore list" -- really? Come on now... do you really think we'd do something like that? Give us some credit now... sheesh. –  Alex Papadimoulis Sep 30 '09 at 6:24
    
Count this answer off the starting gun. But the rest still rings true. –  random Sep 30 '09 at 7:27

I know this has already been fixed, but I just ended up fixining it on my own StackExchange... I also rewrote the getTagsSelector() function to be a little more streamlined. Perhaps Jarrod will learn to love jQuery a bit more:

function getTagsSelector(jPrefs) {
  var replacements = {
    '#': 'ñ',
    '+': 'ç',
    '.': 'û'
  };
  // jPrefs is a jQuery set
  return jPrefs.map(function() {
    var tag = $(this).text().replace(/(\s+|\xa0|#|\+|\.)/g, function(match) {
      if (replacements.hasOwnProperty(match)) return replacements[match];
      return '';
    });
    if (tag.indexOf('*')>-1) {
      return "div.tags:regex(class,t-"+tag.replace(/\*/g, ".*")+")";
    }
    return "div.t-"+tag;
  }).get().join(",");
}

EDIT noting Jarrod's comment about &nbsp; not being matched by \s - I added \xa0 to the match for replacements

share|improve this answer
    
My post on meta.se about this: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3916/… –  gnarf Jan 23 '10 at 1:41
    
I'll check it out - thank you! –  Jarrod Dixon Jan 24 '10 at 10:27
    
Interestingly enough, my function seems to take a fraction of a ms longer, but It looks cooler shrugs -- quite a bit of it is locked up in the jQuery .map function -- the total performace seems to be about .1ms (~20%) slower than the other way for... not that much time is spent in this function anyway... was just bored :) –  gnarf Jan 24 '10 at 10:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .