Code has been pushed!

[mark]

Hiya, as per yesterday's announcement, the latest Dreamwidth code has been deployed.

This is the issue/bug/problem tracking post! Please let us know if you see anything... untoward.

Fixed

• Posting an entry would tell you that your password was blank.
• API key generation/deletion was... behaving a little weird.
• Profiles pages were converted to Markdown, but this was too soon. I've put them back to raw HTML, they should look like they did before the push!

Known Issues

• Chrome auto-filling in password forms, when trying to post as the already logged in user, results in an error. Still haven't fixed this one, but we will.
• Reports of logging out possibly not? Need more information, login/logout work for me. Seems transient?

And as a reminder, if you use Semagic et al, please check the link above for information on how to configure it to keep working with Dreamwidth!

Comments

[denise]

Site skins don't have the journal navbar because it would a) complicate the code for the site skins considerably, which would have a small but noticeable effect on page load times and server load, b) require massive visual tweaking to not be a usability nightmare due to having multiple navigational elements; c) have a lot of problems with assistive technology, since many of the semantic labeling we use in both the site skin navigational elements and the journal navbar navigational elements should be unique per page.

[jhumor]

Thanks for your replies - both here and on the suggestion side. From the user-side, looking at the formatting differences, I didn't realise the coding would be that complex.

I'll consider your suggestion for changing formatting for my journals and applying that globally, but the benefit of the site skin is I don't have to edit it for every journal, since the browser cookie remembers my setting, whereas, I'd have to change the actual design of every journal to use that suggestion. I might just bookmark the filters I use most often in the browsers on my mobile device and do it that way. That isn't as streamlined, but is much simpler and I wouldn't have thought to do it that way had you not made your other suggestions, so it's a compromise :)