OY!

[blufive]

LJ have just tweaked their HTML/CSS cleaner, according to the support page. In the process, they drove cart and horses through my carefully hand-crafted S1 style here. It may take come time to sort it out. If anyone can point me at a list of what exactly this new beastie is twitchy about, it could make my life a lot easier; otherwise I'm going to have to reverse-engineer things to work out what is and isn't allowed.

While they have some legitimate concerns* I think they're currently stripping stuff that's pretty harmless. For example, how the hell can <style type="text/css"> be malicious?

Well, at least it proves that my "graceful degradation" works as intended...

*there are some downright terrifying browser-specific features out there, from the perspective of defending against cross-site scripting attacks.

[edit: there was a post on the subject on lj_maintenance shortly after a wrote this. I think I'll wait a day or two for things to settle down before I attempt to clean up. I mean, it's not like many people read this journal in the native style, rather than via their own LJ-friends view or some other aggregator]

Comments

[kingandy]

My journal style got screwed over too, and that was one of their built-in ones (I've since switched over to a much more simple one that actually works a lot better, though I'd rather a non-serif font.)

FWIW, it doesn't seem to be objecting to <style type="text/css">, it just "cleans" what's inside them. Where you may be going wrong is using an @import (which is, apparently, suspect) instead of <link rel="stylesheet" href="[address]" type="text/css">...

[tinyjo.livejournal.com]

Which was the built in style that wasn't working, out of interest?

[kingandy]

Bloggish, I think. It lost a bunch of stuff like background images and ... actually I think that was it, but it was enough of a cosmetic annoyance that I decided to change.

My main criteria for viewing style is that it should display user icons on my individual posts, and collapse down to view on a PDA reasonably well (ie as little side-scrolling as possible). I've not viewed my current ("Magazine") on PDA yet but it looks like it should be reasonable...

[stsquad.livejournal.com]

"to view on a PDA reasonably well"

What the PDA you couldn't justify paying for but only occasionally use on the semi-permanent loan? :-P

[kingandy]

That's the one! It's not a massive factor but if I'm going to read LJ on a PDA at all I'd rather not be excessively scrolling.

And no, I couldn't justify it, what with having no money and no income at the time. I sort of thought you'd prefer rent that month...

[blufive.livejournal.com]

What browser on the PDA? And how does my journal look ATM, if you don't mind me asking*? (apart from being in boring black-and-white-o-vision)

*Yes, you just became a Potential Usability Tester!

[kingandy]

I use the built-in IE, and I'll try to remember to look next time I pick it up. I'd imagine it looks fine, though.

[blufive.livejournal.com]

Cheers.

<gratuitous browser pimpage>
I hear lots of good things about Opera's PDA browsers, though I've never had a chance to try it myself.
</gratuitous browser pimpage>

[kingandy]

Yeah, looks fine from here. The page does stretch out thanks to a J2EE dump halfway down the page, but the rest of the content stays inside the browser window so that's OK.