CSS question...or disappointment

[Adlago]

Why did you remove direct CSS editing???
The entire suite is full of CSS errors anyway - and now you're complicating any improvement....
This version is absolute bullfaeces...
No performance improvement, but some absolute crap you've done...
I am so disappointed that I don't know if I will continue to be client...

Edited July 6, 2022 by Adlago

[My Sharona]

So if I have any Custom CSS, it is now gone with 4.7?

[Dll]

No, the custom CSS is still there @My Sharona. 

[Jim M]

10 minutes ago, My Sharona said:

So if I have any Custom CSS, it is now gone with 4.7?

Custom CSS is still present. Only direct editing of our core CSS (which shouldn't really be done) has been removed.

[Matt]

As mentioned above, we would prefer that the core CSS is not edited, and instead that you use the custom/ folder(s) to add your custom CSS.

This gives us the option in the future to serve all CSS from a single set of CSS files on a fast CDN.

There is an issue with those that *have* edited core CSS files, and I'm working on an update to solve that.

[Adlago]

6 minutes ago, Matt said:

As mentioned above, we would prefer that the core CSS is not edited, and instead that you use the custom/ folder(s) to add your custom CSS.

This gives us the option in the future to serve all CSS from a single set of CSS files on a fast CDN.

There is an issue with those that *have* edited core CSS files, and I'm working on an update to solve that.

Anyone who doesn't know what they are doing should find an acquaintance and pay themselves, or create an additional paid job for you. You can mention it in your product's terms of use. Which will justify additional maintenance payments on your support through no fault of your own.
But depriving the entire community because of units that give you headaches - that's complete stupidity...

[Matt]

I don't understand what the issue is @Adlago?

You can still edit and add custom CSS.

[Adlago]

16 minutes ago, Matt said:

I don't understand what the issue is @Adlago?

You can still edit and add custom CSS.

Apparently there is no point in explanations. I will easily go back to 4.6. And I will leave the community here. Unfortunately...
PS. I know how everything can change with a designer mode, but this is not a solution for the optimization of an active site, but only for a new development.
Sorry

[Jordan Miller]

Hey @Adlago, sorry you're feeling frustrated. What are you hoping to accomplish that you can't with the latest update? Maybe we can find some solutions together. 

[Adlago]

2 minutes ago, Jordan Miller said:

Hey @Adlago, sorry you're feeling frustrated. What are you hoping to accomplish that you can't with the latest update? Maybe we can find some solutions together. 

Restore direct CSS edit and everything will be OK

[Jordan Miller]

27 minutes ago, Adlago said:

Restore direct CSS edit and everything will be OK

We are trying to discourage editing the core css files. Let's see if we can find another route. Can you expand on what specifically you want to achieve and maybe we can find a solution together. 😃 

[Randy Calvert]

@Jordan Miller one idea might be to restore the editor, but make any change done to CSS export to overrides within the custom.css.  I find it helpful to understand what is there now so that I can see how/why you do something.  In fact, I might use something you do as a basis for something else in one of my Pages databases for continuity.  

Overall power users hate having tools taken away...  however there could be a way to allow power users what they're used to while still pushing the changes they make into the new system you want it to be without forcing them to just give up visibility in the first place.

Essentially I'm suggesting restore the editor...  when a change is submitted, parse it versus the original and send those changes to custom.css.  When viewing the editor again, load the diff and show the updated version.  

[Adlago]

23 minutes ago, Jordan Miller said:

We are trying to discourage editing the core css files. Let's see if we can find another route. Can you expand on what specifically you want to achieve and maybe we can find a solution together. 😃 

95% of your base CSS is not used effectively - and every online test shows it. Especially when a site uses external ads.
Also, there are enough ways to combine effectively used css into one css - and notice, without changing the structure of your development - just a small change in loading. Etc.
Any such change, even a small one, involves direct css editing... And a lot of testing and analysis... But it's worth the effort... This can't be done in designer mode, only in direct editing... It's individual for each site, each site uses different resources and requires different tweaks to improve... Etc.
With these restrictions you are now "scoring an own goal"...

PS. See your site

All this slows down the loading of the site, especially on mobile. With direct editing CSS and ...one more thing, a solution to this delay is found...

Edited July 6, 2022 by Adlago

[Matt]

I accept that the very few who make significant edits to our core CSS will find this change uncomfortable. The vast majority want to add or override existing CSS, so this change will not affect them.

We want to get to a point where we can serve CSS from a single set of files via a CDN. We also want to overhaul and modernise our CSS for efficiency and enabling a more streamlined output from a better build process.

These things do take time, and we have to take steps towards that goal, and drawing a line with 4.7.0 and asking that core CSS is not edited is the first step towards this.

As a temporary measure, a template edit in core/front/global/includeCSS to remove the framework CSS and instead link to a separate directory of your own optimised CSS would enable you to carry on with your heavily optimised CSS. I can help you with this if you wanted to explore this.

[Adlago]

5 hours ago, Matt said:

As a temporary measure, a template edit in core/front/global/includeCSS to remove the framework CSS and instead link to a separate directory of your own optimised CSS would enable you to carry on with your heavily optimised CSS. I can help you with this if you wanted to explore this.

This is not going to help.
I do something else in the direction of optimizing the CSS when loading.
1. My custom css has another purpose - I have created new templates - first I load custom css - in this my custom css, I have created a copy of almost every css file, but in these copies content is only of used rules.
2. My main css (framework.css etc) is loaded from another template, following a template for custom css - so the browser extracts the used rules very quickly and starts displaying the page, it turned out that all the other rules from the main css are loaded quickly, but they do not affect the delay.
3. My real custom css I load inline css before closing head.
In this way, I achieve up to 95 points score for mobile maximum and 80 minimum, depending on server load.
This construction works optimally. I still have some work to do, but apparently I'll have to use designer mode, which will slow down my time a lot.

[Dll]

@Adlago - have you looked into how those changes affect actual users rather than test scores? I know you like your tests etc, but improvements are only of use when they actually positively impact the user experience and load time by a discernable amount. This is why things like core web vitals exist now, as that's specifically measuring how a site loads for a user. 

You're probably going down a rabbit hole with all this stuff which improves your scores but maybe makes <50ms difference to page load time, which in turn makes little to no difference when it comes to an actual person using your website. 

It's up to you of course, but for most website developers there are way more worthwhile and impactful things to be doing with their time. 

Edited July 7, 2022 by Dll

[Adlago]

9 minutes ago, Dll said:

@Adlago - have you looked into how those changes affect actual users rather than test scores? I know you like your tests etc, but improvements are only of use when they actually positively impact the user experience and load time by a discernable amount. This is why things like core web vitals exist now, as that's specifically measuring how a site loads for a user.

Yes, I have done similar optimization on various large (with many users) sites. For each such site, it takes about 2 weeks of work - but after that, all Web Vitals are within normal limits. Here is an example from such a site

[Dll]

2 minutes ago, Adlago said:

Yes, I have done similar optimization on various large (with many users) sites. For each such site, it takes about 2 weeks of work - but after that, all Web Vitals are within normal limits. Here is an example from such a site

But here's the thing, here's one for a community without your updates, not really any difference?

[Adlago]

3 minutes ago, Dll said:

But here's the thing, here's one for a community without your updates, not really any difference?

What do you want me to comment on this? My example is from a site where before optimization all indicators were bad.

[Dll]

I'm just suggesting that there are better ways to achieve what you're hoping to without spending hours and hours hacking about in the css. Particularly as that's now harder to do.

And on top of that, once a website is fast enough that its speed doesn't affect the user experience negatively, you're chasing ever diminishing returns for your time, regardless of how good your speed scores get. Particularly when you consider the myriad of other things which go into making a website worthwhile for a user that you could be spending your time on. 

Edited July 7, 2022 by Dll

[JohnDar]

For my part, I would be happy if all CSS were readable, as before, for reference even if not editable. The latest patch shows modified CSS and allows reverts of existing changes but unchanged CSS are still hidden and therefore, you can't use search.

It was so useful being able to search for something (even something as simple as a colour) and then quickly locate the code, copy it and then paste a modded version into custom CSS.

[sadams101]

On 7/6/2022 at 1:53 PM, Jordan Miller said:

We are trying to discourage editing the core css files. Let's see if we can find another route. Can you expand on what specifically you want to achieve and maybe we can find a solution together. 😃 

I also cannot believe that you've removed this, and, after more than 15 years, and also looking at alternative boards to import my site into...totally unacceptable!

Your site speed is absolutely horrid...the only way I've been able to make my site get even average speed scores has been through extensive modification of CSS--now you've removed this ability from my--WHY??!!

[Adlago]

23 hours ago, Matt said:

We want to get to a point where we can serve CSS from a single set of files via a CDN. We also want to overhaul and modernise our CSS for efficiency and enabling a more streamlined output from a better build process.

In my opinion, what you are writing is about a qualitatively new version - for example, 5.0 with preset new parameters.
With small changes and bans in the existing versions of the 4.x family, you will only make things worse for your customers and probably turn many of them away....
Your idea is good, even avant-garde, but it will work only with a qualitatively new version - not with the 4.x family

[Adlago]

17 hours ago, Dll said:

I'm just suggesting that there are better ways to achieve what you're hoping to without spending hours and hours hacking about in the css. Particularly as that's now harder to do.

Last night I went to work and built a new theme of mine based on 4.7.
In this theme I introduced my customizations in the accessible CSS.
Test scores - 100 points for desktop and an appalling 55-60 for mobile.
It is clear that IPS developers work actively only for desktop, and as it can be seen from tests on this site - they do nothing at all for mobile.
Given that they have neglected mobile, what is the point of preventing users from seeking their own solutions for mobile enhancements for their users...
I understand that IPS have ideas for modernization, but on a well-functioning version, to off the "fuel tank" because you want a motor to run on electricity is tantamount to a disaster...

[opentype]

It’s understandable that you don’t like this change as it prevents you from doing something you have gotten used to, but please keep it honest and factual. 

Quote

what is the point of preventing users from seeking their own solutions for mobile enhancements for their users

This was already answered. Clearly and thoroughly. So why ask it again? This is actually a dishonest debate tactic. By keep asking it, even though it was already answered, you are trying to suggest there is no good answer. 

Quote

and probably turn many of them away....

And you know this how? So far, from the 27,436 active clients you are the ONLY ONE who mentioned a clear need to make drastic changes to the core CSS files. So it is questionable to suggest that “many” will turn away, when you have no foundation whatsoever to say that. You are likely just claiming it to give your position more weight.