Hashtags in content warnings don't work

[nevillepark]

Currently, hashtags in the content warning field just behave like plain text. Here's an example.

This is inconvenient if, for example, a user wants to hide their #introductions post behind a content warning, but wants other users to be able to find other #introductions posts by clicking on the hashtag. It also prevents the effective use of hashtags for things some people may want to filter out and others may want to follow, like #food or #discourse.

[ProgVal]

If a hashtag is in the content of a toot, it appears in the search even if the toot has a content warning.
So I don't think it's an issue.

[ProgVal]

If a hashtag is in the content of a toot, it appears in the search even if the toot has a content warning.
So I don't think it's an issue.

[nevillepark]

Sorry, this is what I mean: https://mastodon.social/@nev/1529407

If the hashtag is in the content warning, it isn't clickable and it doesn't appear in search results.

[nevillepark]

Sorry, this is what I mean: https://mastodon.social/@nev/1529407

If the hashtag is in the content warning, it isn't clickable and it doesn't appear in search results.

[ProgVal]

Indeed, I misunderstood.

However, since content warnings are not displayed on non-mastodon instances, allowing tags there would create a gap between mastodon and the rest

[ProgVal]

Indeed, I misunderstood.

However, since content warnings are not displayed on non-mastodon instances, allowing tags there would create a gap between mastodon and the rest

[skddc]

However, since content warnings are not displayed on non-mastodon instances, allowing tags there would create a gap between mastodon and the rest

Maybe that's a good thing. If it works and is being used and liked by users, then it could make adding it to the underlying protocols and getting it adopted by other implementations a bit easier. If it's already outside of specs, then we might as well improve the feature based on user feedback and needs. No?

[skddc]

However, since content warnings are not displayed on non-mastodon instances, allowing tags there would create a gap between mastodon and the rest

Maybe that's a good thing. If it works and is being used and liked by users, then it could make adding it to the underlying protocols and getting it adopted by other implementations a bit easier. If it's already outside of specs, then we might as well improve the feature based on user feedback and needs. No?

[nevillepark]

Hmm. I wonder if there is a way to maintain the CW functionality on Mastodon, but degrade gracefully for non-Mastodon instances, in the Atom feed, etc. E. g. CW: {cw field} | {status}.

[nevillepark]

Hmm. I wonder if there is a way to maintain the CW functionality on Mastodon, but degrade gracefully for non-Mastodon instances, in the Atom feed, etc. E. g. CW: {cw field} | {status}.

[Gargron]

We have attempted to make content warnings contain rich text, including mentions, links and hashtags. However, this meant that content warnings could not be copied into new toots automatically any longer. It is simpler to think of them as a plain text label on top of the actual content.

[Gargron]

We have attempted to make content warnings contain rich text, including mentions, links and hashtags. However, this meant that content warnings could not be copied into new toots automatically any longer. It is simpler to think of them as a plain text label on top of the actual content.

[sparr]

@Gargron "this meant that content warnings could not be copied into new toots automatically any longer"

why not?

[sparr]

@Gargron "this meant that content warnings could not be copied into new toots automatically any longer"

why not?

[sparr]

@ProgVal why aren't content warnings displayed on non-mastodon instances? Can they not just be included at the top of the post?

[sparr]

@ProgVal why aren't content warnings displayed on non-mastodon instances? Can they not just be included at the top of the post?