4 ms·
Do you really think non-developers are creating user stylesheets to begin with? As the commit message notes, the current setup already requires putting a .css
by haberman 13y ago
Do you really think non-developers are creating user stylesheets to begin with?
As the commit message notes, the current setup already requires putting a .css file in the right location inside the user-data-dir.
- RexRollman 13y agoI have seen more than a few Linux screenshots with customized Xdefaults and customized user stylesheets. Granted, they are advanced user, but they were not developers.
- ubernostrum 13y agoI have had to walk people through the process of downloading a user stylesheet and setting it up for use, typically for accessibility purposes. I don't want to imagine that process getting even more complex than it already is.
- haberman 13y agoAn extension like Stylish makes it much easier to install a custom stylesheet than the standard "user stylesheet" feature. Not harder.
- sirn 13y agoAs author of Safari User CSS extension[1], most of support email I've ever got are from non-developers. There are many kind I can recall, from those who simply want to adjust font sizes of a site permanently, to following tutorials on website on how to customize YouTube layout, to those that wrote userstyles on their own. I even got questions like "how do I turn Google black"/"how do I remove x from this url" sometimes. I'm not sure about Chrome, but Safari had a similar feature but it lacked a way to scope stylesheets to certain domain. If Chrome userstyles behaves the same way then I don't think this change will affect those users anyway since being able to scope userstyles to certain domain seems very important to them. [1] http://code.grid.in.th http://code.grid.in.th
- userbinator 13y ago> Do you really think non-developers are creating user stylesheets to begin with? Then ask yourself why they are called user stylesheets? IMHO all these attempts at taking away features "because most of the users won't ever use them" or similar reasons, and then saying "but developers can just do {more complicated thing}, it's better" is a terribly wrong direction that a lot of software seems to be heading in. "Most of the users won't ever use them" is definitely a valid observation, but how about the ones who do? They probably use them because they discovered that feature and decided to play with it more, learn about it, and found out how useful it could be. By removing them, many more who would've otherwise discovered them will not, they will have a harder time learning about these things that benefit them, and instead remain ignorant. I find this to be almost patronising.
- haberman 13y agoThis isn't "taking a feature away." It is deciding that such a feature is better implemented in extensions. An extension like this: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/stylish/fjnbnpbmkenffdnngjfgmeleoegfcffe?hl=en https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/stylish/fjnbnpbmke...
- rynes 13y agoI am a non dev. I just tried the recipe provided by leobelle using the files provided in gist.github and it works fine. I had to change "matches" to use "<all_urls>" though. ------------------- Now I get a popup whenever I start Chrome telling me to disable developer mode extensions -- how to get rid of that?