Timeline for New post formatting
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2, 2020 at 9:27 | comment | added | Christian Rau | Well, of course, just using the old font sizes from the last 10 years would solve it. But...that'd be the solution for this whole "new" formatting afterall. ;-) | |
| Sep 2, 2020 at 9:10 | comment | added | Sebastian Simon |
@ChristianRau Making # result in <h2> has at least two problems: it requires rerendering all posts again, which potentially breaks posts that couldn’t be migrated to CommonMark, so it may not be worth it for this “incorrect” use-case; and I used these headings correctly, so I’d have to edit every single answer of mine that uses headings to fix them manually. I could agree with decreasnig the font size in CSS by one heading level.
|
|
| Sep 2, 2020 at 8:53 | comment | added | Christian Rau |
Yeah, I noticed this just recently, too. Now all my carefully crafted one-liners are literally and metaphorically broken. And I was almost about to laud them for putting back a bit more sanity into the line spacing when I noticed those monstrous headings. And I don't particularly care if it was called "h1", "h2", or "squagglegobbles", it was a sub heading inside the answer. If I, and everybody else, used it "wrong" for the last 10 years, that's not quite a good reason to just break all those old posts to "teach a lesson" or whatever. Then make # h2 rather than h1.
|
|
| Sep 2, 2020 at 1:04 | comment | added | Shog9 | I'm with @user289905 on this: H1 usage should be very rare, as every question page already has one at the top; regardless of how it's rendered, semantically you're creating a new top-level section which... Rarely makes sense in questions and never makes sense in answers. The, heh, BIGGER issue here is that it makes the question title bigger - longer - and causes some titles to wrap that previously didn't. | |
| Sep 2, 2020 at 0:19 | history | edited | Prid | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added explanation from comment section to the post
|
| Sep 1, 2020 at 16:17 | comment | added | Prid | @Catija: thanks for the heads up, makes perfect sense :) | |
| Sep 1, 2020 at 12:49 | comment | added | Catija StaffMod | @Prid Please put explanations like that in your actual answer, not in the comments - I know you're responding to me but the important thing is that the argument you're making is in your actual post. Telling us "this is bad" without suggesting what to do instead or even explaining why it's a problem leaves us with no next steps. Help us out by giving us whatever guidance you recommend - we may not do it the way you suggest but it gives us somewhere to start. | |
| Sep 1, 2020 at 8:38 | comment | added | Prid |
@user289905: the formatting syntax is in Markdown, so it's hard to realize that # = h1. I guess they should change # to h2 instead :)
|
|
| Sep 1, 2020 at 8:17 | comment | added | Sebastian Simon |
Semantically, answers shouldn’t even have an <h1>, because that’s reserved for the title of the page, which is the question title. That at least is the opinion of me and MDN.
|
|
| Sep 1, 2020 at 3:16 | history | edited | Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 26 characters in body
|
| Sep 1, 2020 at 3:03 | comment | added | Prid |
@10Repisn'tactiveonMSE: oh, no problem at all in having more diversity :) i'm merely pointing out older posts being affected by this in that their intended purpose may get lost. The old h1 size was closer to the current h2, and the author likely intended it as an h2 heading due to its size. The increase in size changes the intended meaning, and thus the intended formatting of the author. I'd like old answers to be preserved as much as possible with their original intended formatting.
|
|
| Sep 1, 2020 at 2:49 | comment | added | 10 Rep | @Prid I kinda see your point, but I also don't see the problem. It's actually more helpful to have bigger headers, rather than small ones. | |
| Sep 1, 2020 at 2:48 | comment | added | Prid |
@Catija: h1 (or # in MD) clearly never had the correct font-size, so its usage was more akin to a sub-heading rather than denoting an enitrely new section. With the increase in size, the intended meaning is lost and the new bigger size gives off a different connotation. In the left image h1 works as a sub-heading that coherently fits the full answer, while in the right image the new h1 size makes the sub-sections feel disjointed and like separate articles. The author might've been using it incorrectly, but the change in size is too big and disproportionate to the paragraph font size.
|
|
| Sep 1, 2020 at 2:28 | history | edited | Prid | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added link to post
|
| Sep 1, 2020 at 2:24 | comment | added | Catija StaffMod | What in your image is "undesired formatting effects"? | |
| Sep 1, 2020 at 2:22 | history | answered | Prid | CC BY-SA 4.0 |