The removal of the alternate stylesheet switcher

Will Rickards WT · Post by **Will Rickards WT** » August 25th, 2004, 7:11 am

In the end I could see it becoming an extension or part of the web developer extension or some mozilla foundation web developer extension.
But I think it shows the power of css to the web users out there and it doesn't hurt anything to leave it in.

As far as being confusing to grandma, maybe she clicks it. What is the worst that can happen? She sees an unstyled page? She actually discovers the cooler alternative style to the page? What if she thinks she screwed something up and wants to go back. The current bugs allow her to do that, just reload the page if you've got no theme selected. It goes back to the basic theme.

What about confusing page styles with firefox themes. I think what it does becomes very clear once you use it.

bickle · Post by **bickle** » August 25th, 2004, 7:19 am

driverkt wrote:You know who this is starting to sound like?

Microsoft.

That is what I was thinking as well, after hearing comments suggesting that it isn't needed for the average user, and that features should be portioned out so that there are some to include in future releases!

As others have posted, please present a cogent analysis of why it should be removed. What are the bugs that should halt it's inclusion? The bugs in Will's post are pretty minor, as he mentioned.

Unless someone comes up with specific reasons that it shouldn't be included, it seems like the removal would be an unnecessary step backwards.

bmason · Post by **bmason** » August 25th, 2004, 7:32 am

Cast my vote to retain it. No one has shown that there's a bug of such severity that it has to be pulled and plenty of valid reasons to keep it have been offered.

If you're determined to get it out of there because you don't want a "buggy" (which is arguable) feature exposed to Joe User for 1.0, why not make access to it something that you can select if you do a custom install and choose the still-unused "additional browsing enhancements" install option?

That way those who want it and have the know-how to know why they want it and how to use it have a way to get it without having to wait for an extension (or FireFox 1.5) to do so. And the average user who probably will never miss it will most likely never see it.

Conrad2 · Post by **Conrad2** » August 25th, 2004, 8:27 am

Blake wrote:The number of potential users we'll lose to XP SP2 when it's fully deployed if we delay 1.0 is infinitely higher than the number we'll gain if we wait til minor features like stylesheet switching are working perfectly.

You said that because IE on SP2 implement some basics functions FF has. Ok. So users will not really see why using FF instead of IE. So, in response to that, you drop fonctionnality out of FF. So users will have fewer advantages to switch. Funny isn't it ?

Installing extensions IE users already do that. It calls myIE2, Google bar etc . I'm not sure mass public prefers extensions than built-in functionalities & options.

You make a choice, hope for the web you're right. Personnaly I stick with FF 0.8.

Last point : extensions (and the update site) are massively english-only.

jabberwocky_rt · Post by **jabberwocky_rt** » August 25th, 2004, 9:01 am

http://gospel.booleangate.org/el_goat/g ... /test.html

Over the past few weeks, I've been developing a relatively simple file tree viewer, used to display files and source code for various projects, to replace the "old and busted" one I made a few months ago as a crap app, I had to write it within an hour before turning in a school project. One of the key features of this new version is that through alternate style sheets, users can select the interface that best suites their needs while viewing the contents of a folder.

Example:
Users can choose one of 3 stylesheets, not including “no theme:” "Standard," "Large Fonts," and "Small Comments." Each of these stylesheets has a different purpose:
Standard - standard default theme
Large Fonts - Larger font sizes for those "blind people"

(yes I am aware that you can bump up font sizes via View > "Imcrease Text Size"
Small Comments - Included in every directory is a simple data file that can store things like "comments" on for things such as the contents of a specific file, revisions, etc. Seeing as how some comments, on a file or folder, can be excessively large, viewing a page could require scrolling miles before hitting the next item. Therefore, users have the option of greatly decrease the size of the file/folder "comments" only. The size of everything else on the page remains exactly the same. Decreasing the size of every element on a page would completely defeat the concept behind this feature, that being decreasing the size of what might be considered trivial data to most people.

Ever since I first noticed the little icon in the bottom left-hand side of the window, I have fallen in love with it.

IT IS ONE OF THE KEY FEATURES I PUSH AS A REASON TO SWITCH TO FIREFOX!

I have convinced several software developers within a VERY large and well known corporation to not only implement this feature, alternate stylesheets, into several internal/external project, but to also push management to SERIOUSLY consider switching to Firefox.

However, when it comes to alternate stylesheets, if by the time FF 1.0 comes out this feature is removed, why bother wasting the man-hours it takes to develop multiple stylesheets for a project? Anyone who has ever dealt with large software developers knows that, more often than not, once a feature is dropped, it takes a LONG time for it to even be considered as a possible addition in an upgrade.

Yes, I understand that the integrity of a product comes first in the eyes of [a] GOOD developers, however, hard to find quirks in a widely appreciated feature is not a reason to yank it from a major release. Granted, this assumes that there isn't some bug that will lock up my system, allow someone to "0wn" my machine, or, “replace my Nair with my Rogaine, and my Rogain with my Nair."

If it works for 90%+ of the users, no I don't have numbers to back that, sue me, its not worth removing. Lets fix it as we go along.

Please, don't make, many of, us feel like we wasted all that time, effort, and energy integrating and bragging about things like this…

eclip5e · Post by **eclip5e** » August 25th, 2004, 9:02 am

I think the switcher should be included since its part of the CSS2 spec. It kinda works as it is now, so leave it in along with release notes that say its broken, then fix it.

As it is, i'm installing 5 extentions when i install Firefox....

I'm feeling a "Nimo's Extension pack" coming out soon after 1.0.

jrduncans · Post by **jrduncans** » August 25th, 2004, 9:15 am

jabberwocky_rt wrote:http://gospel.booleangate.org/el_goat/gospel2/nastv/unused/test/test.html

Please, don't make, many of, us feel like we wasted all that time, effort, and energy integrating and bragging about things like this…

If you really need to offer the multiple style-sheets, see this: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/alternate/

That has, towards the bottom, some javascript that will allow users to change style sheets. This works in multiple browsers.

bryanl · Post by **bryanl** » August 25th, 2004, 9:23 am

Ok, I ran some real numbers as preliminaries. So far on this thread, not counting the Dev team appearances (Blake only, thus far), we've got 29 (including myself) against removing it, out of 35. And one of those converted mid-way, near as I can tell.

1) It's been pointed out that a way to switch alternate style sheets is a mandatory for CSS2 compliance. Personally, I use Firefox because of it's level of w3 compliance. Tabbed browsing and default pop-up blocking is nice, but if IE had better support for w3 standards, I'd wave goodbye to Firefox. This argument would be different if we were discussing putting the style switcher into 1.0, but it's been there all along. Removing support for w3 specs sets a very bad precedent.

2) It's been pointed out that until now, the vast majority of Firefox's end-users have not noticed any bugs with the AltSS. And that we've had 3 years to find them. At this point, they're minor. Now, I'm not really adept at the Bugzilla interface, so my ability to see what others have found is limited.

2a) http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216537
This is not a bug, but actually how the UA should work. The default style sheet is set by the owner of the page, and is what should be loaded. Perhaps additional functunality such as "Save My CSS Prefs" could be added, but that is a feature to be put in, not a bug that needs to be removed.

2b) http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=253332
This is also not quite a bug. Sure, the AltSS is not keyboard accessible quite yet. Work on it. Effectively, removing AltSS because it's not keyboard accessible is the same as getting a flat tire, then deciding to, instead of fixing the flat, slash the 3 remaining tires. Results thus far have not been good.

2c) *http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=178161
THIS has already happened once. Oddly enough, a little more than a year ago. The community was not pleased with it then. It obviously isn't now. Why would you repeat a mistake of the past?

3) It's been pointed out that the 1.0 release is not for the 0.5% that use it now, but for the 99.5% who do not. Now, let's think about this for a second:

3a) The 0.5% are your current word-of-mouth marketing. You don't want to have them dislike your product.

3b) The 0.5% use Firefox for a reason. Obviously the features. Obviously this feature is important to them (82% of that 0.5% so far...). If this is one of the reasons we switched, why remove it and give the 99.5% less of a reason to switch?

3c) The word-of-mouth marketing will also work against you once the 99.5% hear that Firefox is disloyal to its current users and is intentionally non-standards-compliant. That just won't bode well for anyone.

4) It's been suggested that someone could write an extension for it. Which is fine for things like Bookmark Synchronizer and Web Developer. However, referring to the w3 specs, this feature is mandatory. Not suggested. Not hoped for. Mandatory. That right there should quell any arguments for removing AltSS, when coupled with #2.

That should cover more or less everything. In summary:

-Your current user base wants it kept in and it is a feature most of them rely on.
-AltSS is a mandatory per w3 specs.
-No one even knew that there were any major bugs, and none of the bugs currently listed can be considered critical or even bad.

Keep it in.

[edit]After posting, I noticed some others posted before me. #s are now 31:6, or 84%[/edit]

Robert S. · Post by **Robert S.** » August 25th, 2004, 9:34 am

Out of curiosity... is the update notification in the statusbar keyboard accessible? I would think that would be a much higher priority item to make keyboard accessible if it is not. If it is... how does one access it from the keyboard? If it isn't... will it also be removed?

Also, IMO the bugs associated with the new EM far outweigh the bugs with the alt stylesheet switcher in both severity and number... I also believe the update notification is part of that component though I may be mistaken. I would hate to see the new EM removed... I'd like to see the bugs fixed instead. Same goes for the alt stylesheet switcher but even the bugs associated with it are not severe IMO and don't jusitify the removal of it.

Post by **BenBasson** » August 25th, 2004, 9:43 am

As long as it's available long-term, I don't mind either way. I do like this feature, but it's not critical. Hopefully we'll see it return as an extension for the time being until the developers deem that core support is ready to return...

If AltSS is dropped entirely, I'd see that as a mistake, but admittedly, it's not all that useful to end-users without style sheet persistence. If we can achieve a full implementation (and there's no reason other than 1.0's release deadline why we cannot) then we should go for it. Firefox doesn't have to be all inclusive, but I think anyone who suggests that removing this entirely has severely under-estimated it's importance.

stylo~ · Post by **stylo~** » August 25th, 2004, 9:56 am

>>it's not all that useful to end-users without style sheet persistence

Keep in mind that it's not just for switching stylesheets. There is no "no-style" accessibility view available in FF as there should be EXCEPT via the AltSS feature. I personally use that function all the time. (You could use it on these forums if the auther added a title to the stylesheet, or the function were enhanced to always offer a no-style view as I strongly think it should.)

Mozcerize · Post by **Mozcerize** » August 25th, 2004, 10:20 am

>>it's not all that useful to end-users without style sheet persistence

Well it seems logical to combine the switcher with the code developed by Rob Tougher in his Style Sheet Chooser extension which does provide persistence.

And the "No Style" view *is* there all the time, but it depends on what theme you are using as to how obvious it is. In the default theme, and in most of the themes currently available, the icon disappears if there are no alternate themes, but the bit of the status bar where the icon goes is still clickable and "No Style" can be chosen; very useful for badly designed pages.

It would take minimal effort to ensure that an icon appears all the time, perhaps a different one if there are alternate themes on top of the "Basic Theme" and "No Theme". Currently I force this to happen through my userChrome.css, but this could easily be incorporated into the main app.

Conrad2 · Post by **Conrad2** » August 25th, 2004, 10:31 am

jrduncans wrote:If you really need to offer the multiple style-sheets, see this: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/alternate/

That has, towards the bottom, some javascript that will allow users to change style sheets. This works in multiple browsers.

Note that this script works fine WITH the style switcher

Post by **BenBasson** » August 25th, 2004, 10:34 am

Mozcerize wrote:And the "No Style" view *is* there all the time, but it depends on what theme you are using as to how obvious it is. In the default theme, and in most of the themes currently available, the icon disappears if there are no alternate themes, but the bit of the status bar where the icon goes is still clickable and "No Style" can be chosen; very useful for badly designed pages.

Don't get me wrong, I've used this feature too, but bear in mind that it's effect on a non-css based page will be limited, and a page designed with css will almost always have been designed well, since CSS knowledge and browser-end-compliance is not common enough for "bad" website coders to depend on it for anything other than text styling or flashy effects.

Also, the fact that the switcher is always available via the statusbar is a UI problem in itself. Yes, it's always accessible (which has it's benefits), but if it's always going to be accessible, maybe it should be a toolbar button instead. Changing the icon is potentially a good idea, but an unnecessary *status* icon for most users would only serve to confuse (especially if they click the icon and find that all they can do is make the current page appear broken/wrong/different). Let's use the statusbar for things that need an indication of status (security, popups, updates, etc.) and perhaps campaign for a toolbar button with a dropdown to be implemented in place of the existing UI.

jrduncans · Post by **jrduncans** » August 25th, 2004, 10:44 am

Conrad2 wrote:
jrduncans wrote:If you really need to offer the multiple style-sheets, see this: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/alternate/

That has, towards the bottom, some javascript that will allow users to change style sheets. This works in multiple browsers.

Note that this script works fine WITH the style switcher

Quite. I'm in favor of keeping the style-sheet switch in some form. But throwing away the development effort put into multiple stylesheets isn't one of the arguments in favor that makes a whole lot of sense.

Though accessibility is.

The removal of the alternate stylesheet switcher

Re: Microsoft