in reply to black tags

non-compliant with OP's suggestion, in that it uses class "obscure" rather than "black" (This is in keeping with using class_names which describe their purpose rather than their action as advocated by some 'separate content from rendering' gurus (tho I'm not sure I buy it. cf, for example, the oft-repeated perl advice to "use meanful $var names." Yeah, "purpose" could eq "meaningful" but in some instances could lead to the likes of use vars qw( $kill1 $kill2 $kill3... instead of ($kill_print $kill_sys $kill_whatever... so WTH!)

<p style="color: black; background-color: black;">A B C D E</p>

The monastery did not like the attempted-css-demo above when it was in actual paragraph tags, but saving the html below (<!DOCTYPE... etc, omitted) will allow you to view its operation.
typo above cq'ed: s/)with/) will/ 

<html>
<head>
<style type="text/css">
<!--
.obscure {
color: black;
background-color: #000000;
}
-->
</style>
</head>

<body>

<p class="obscure">abcde</p>
<p>View the chars the blackbox above, by highlighting.   Done without 
+tables. 
&lt;/p>
</body>
</html>

[download]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: black tags
by ktross (Deacon) on Apr 21, 2005 at 19:22 UTC
    If you go to your homenode, select "change user settings", go to the textbox entitled "On-site CSS Markup", and paste: 
    .obscure {
color: black;
background-color: #000000;
}

    [download]
    Then the tag <p class="obscure"> would be viewed as desired. Unfortunately, the tag is useless as an anti-spoiler until everyone does this. sigh.
[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

      To take it to the next step of using tags to describe content rather than behaviour, the tag would be named "spoiler". And then the CSS could, by default, black it out. And individual users could override that by setting it to do something else. e.g., put the word "SPOILER!" in front, and mark it as blue on yellow. In italics. Or something.

      Obscure is an action. Spoiler is a class of text. Mere semantics, but we're accustomed to semantics when naming methods and variables ;->

[reply]

        Indeed. This would also allow us to reserve <code class=obscure> for some of our less-helpful answers or in-jokes. ;-)


        If God had meant us to fly, he would *never* have given us the railroads.
            --Michael Flanders

[reply]
        (:<})

        You're right, Tank; "obscure" is a verb (tho I guess I was thinking of it as shorthand for "obscuration").

        But "spoiler" is better... maybe the developers will incorporate it, as it's clear (in this context)and eminently remember-able!

        ++
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion