in reply to spoiler tag "abuse"

It has been suggested to me that this use of spoiler tags ... causes some kind of problem with something called a "table form"...

Strange. I have "Render <spoiler> tags as" set to table in my Display Settings, and I see <spoiler> blocks perfectly. Black on black, no problem.

My position is that the intent of spoiler tags is to hide the enclosed content until the reader elects to view it

I was fully agreeing with you until I actually looked at the node in question.

The intent of <spoiler> tags is to prevent a certain kind of disservice to your reader, namely, forcing upon their eyes information which they would perhaps have preferred not to see yet. Like the ending of a movie, or the solution of a puzzle.

Instead, by your misuse of the tags, you have perpetrated exactly the opposite kind of disservice to your reader: forcing them to do extra work (or however you'd call the inconvenience) in order to view ordinary code. Keeping "verbocity" hidden is an entirely misguided justification. Code is verbose. We all know that, and live with it.

One more thing: Whether or not you have spoilers on the code in that node, you definitely need <readmore>s around it. It's very long. Thanks.

Btw... If you do find yourself convinced by any of these arguments, I'd ask that you not go back and change your use of spoilers in that node, so that this thread doesn't lose its context of revelance. Thx...

Between the mind which plans and the hands which build, there must be a mediator... and this mediator must be the heart.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: spoiler tag "abuse"
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Dec 11, 2008 at 17:25 UTC
    Whether or not you have spoilers on the code in that node, you definitely need <readmore>s around it. It's very long.

    Now that's a simple idea that would perhaps satisfy everyone. Put the poiler tags inside a readmore.

    If I did that now, the "badness" of the spoiler tags would still be viewable when the post is viewed directly in table form, but it would correct the problem for indirect views. Is that permissible?

    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]
[d/l]
      Is that permissible?

      I would say that for the case at hand it is not only permissible but desirable. However, in general, I still think that using spoiler tags merely to shield readers' eyes from the horror of verbose code is not in line with the FFs' intent, current site doco not withstanding, and actually causes the readers more inconvenience than it purports to allay.

      Anyway, as a saint, you should know that all things are permissible, but not all things are beneficial. :-) (I Cor 10:23)

      Between the mind which plans and the hands which build, there must be a mediator... and this mediator must be the heart.
[reply]
[reply]
        I still think that using spoiler tags merely to shield readers' eyes from the horror of verbose code is not in line with the FFs' intent, current site doco not withstanding, and actually causes the readers more inconvenience than it purports to allay.

        What a croc!

        The whole reason for this thread is because one person is all a lather, because it is inconvenient to him to see that verbose code. But, it is somehow okay for everyone else to suffer that inconvenience, so long as he doesn't. And I'm the one showing hubris?

        Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
        "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
        In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion