TagClouder

[undyingking]

I've added a feature to the TagClouder such that it now offers you the raw HTML to paste into your own page, etc. Unfortunately it comes out like this:

---

books car

Get your own tag cloud from the UKG TagClouder!

---

Presumably LJ is stripping out the <style> ... </style> for security reasons or some such... any thoughts for ways round this? I could go back to doing it with text attributes I suppose, but that seems a bit retrograde...
Any thoughts about this or further improvements welcome!

---

Edit: now a trial with no internal style spec, but linking to an external stylesheet:
books car

Get your own tag cloud from the UKG TagClouder!

Bah, no better.

---

Edit: now a trial with inline style:
books car

Get your own tag cloud from the UKG TagClouder!

oho! -- that looks more promising. Unfortuatnely it involves hacking into the <a> tag, which I'm keen to avoid doing as it will require all manner of hideous regexping. And it this way really any better than using <font>?

Comments

[wimble.livejournal.com]

Ah. That'll be my fault, I suspect ;-)

It's not stripping out the style tags, as an examination of the source for this page shows:

<span class="size4"><a href="http://undyingking.livejournal.com/tag/books">books</a></span> <span class="size2"><a href="http://undyingking.livejournal.com/tag/car">car</a></span> <span class="size2"><a href="http://undyingking.livejournal.com/tag/cats">cats</a></span> <span class="size2"><a href="http://undyingking.livejournal.com/tag/christmas">christmas</a></span>

The problem, of course, is that it doesn't have any definitions in the CSS for what those styles should look like :(

(Reposted using blockquote tags, rather than pre tags, in order to improve the resulting layout)

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

I'll try it linking to an external stylesheet, to see if that works...

[wimble.livejournal.com]

Err, how?

You need to put <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" etc into the page header to do that. Unless I've missed a wonderfully useful trick somewhere!

And whilst you might be able to reconfigure (I don't know: I've not got to grips with LJ's styling modules) your page style to do that, it's not going to affect mine.

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

In FF at least the link doesn't have to be in the header, you can put it in the body. Which surprised me I must say, but I thought I might as well try it and it seems to be the case.

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

Bah, it's stripped that out as well!

Why is this: what's so insecure about stylesheets I wonder?

[chrisvenus]

the fact you can run arbitrary code from them. :)

stylehseets can do clever things including running javascript from offsite, etc.

You tried inline styles? ie style attributes rather than using classes. Dunno if it will be any better but can't be hard to test. :)

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

can they? blimey, I'll have to try that some time ;-)

Mm, good idea, I'll give that a go next.

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

Well, that seems to work OK, but is it really much better than using <font> like I was in the original pre-CSS version?

[chrisvenus]

yes. <font> is deprecated. :)

Also CSS is likely to play more nicely with other style stuff (eg if I want my default font sizes to be twice as big then CSS will probably scale nicely whereas <font> probably won't.

In general though whether it is any better really depends on what criteria you are using to measure.

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

Bah, hideous regexps I guess it is then! -- but not today ;-)