If you would like to keep all functionality of the correct system than I'd say the best option would be to make two user style sheets. Where:
StyleSheet (Is always loaded last) & A new StyleSeet like SubStyleSheet? (Is Loaded where the current StyleSheet is for special needs people like yourself.) My proposal for any change is to make working with TW easier for less savvy users to avoid confusion by telling them they can override things in one place and than overriding them in another without telling them about it. The more I look at my own TiddlyWiki's the more I realize I have overridden a ton of these kinds of plugin styles with out realizing it, due to how I tend to make my CSS and how I build my TWs layouts up. Had I try doing things the normal recommended way there would be a lot of my styling being overridden by plugin style sheets. That being said I have 0 faith in that a core change will take effect given that TWC is pretty much frozen in place with TW5 being made unless a major show stopping bug comes up, so it's not worth arguing about this much at all, but it's a core irritant of mine lately. There needs to be more focus around users ability to have the final say in the way there stuff looks without forcing them to learn to hack things or learn advanced techniques to get around things that shouldn't be to start with. On Sunday, October 27, 2013 7:15:37 PM UTC-7, Arc Acorn wrote: > > You wouldn't be blocking the authors form using this feature you would > just be switching it so that all shadow style sheets are rendered before > the users style sheet. > > No plugin should be using these styles to override users styles to start > with and is highly unlikely to do any damage to a plugin, however it could > save a less savvy user a lot of headache trying to figure out why they > can't override styles in the user style sheet like they are told the can. > > I'd need to see your system to make a real call but it sounds like you > have made a plugin that dynamically shifts colors based on your user style > sheet? > otherwise I'm confused as to why you wouldn't just make style sheets to > link at the button of your user style sheet for the given TW. > > On Sunday, October 27, 2013 6:01:25 PM UTC-7, Scott Simmons wrote: >> >> I can appreciate the development philosophy, but I don't see a compelling >> need for a "fix" here. Said fix, as far as I can conceive it, would >> involve blocking plugin authors from using a (relatively obscure) >> workaround and prevent — what exactly? Hypothetical style-hijacking? It's >> not like there are roaming bands of irresponsible plugin authors wrecking >> people's StyleSheets. Even if there were, people would simply pass on their >> plugins — or request a fix — or fix them themselves. >> >> Not to sound flip. I think the concerns are real (and good ones). I >> just don't want to endorse a fix that takes a tool out of the toolbox to >> combat a problem that's only hypothetical. (If there are real-world >> examples of the load order causing problems, they're pretty rarified and >> likely easily addressed.) >> >> Speaking of rarified, there's a way I benefit from the refreshStyles type >> of plugin: I have several TiddlyWikis whose CSS is identical but have >> different background images. In order to make some elements more readable, >> I've concoted quick-and-dirty plugins to override the default StyleSheet in >> those TWs. Install the plugin, turn it on, and the styles adjust for that >> particular TW without affecting the StyleSheet I use (and update regularly) >> as my go-to. >> >> So it's definitely true that I'm biased in favor of the workaround >> remaining. ;) >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
