51

Following on from various Meta posts about code snippets being misused (like this one and this other one), a few days ago the Code Snippet WYSIWYG button's title was changed from "Code snippet" to "JavaScript snippet":

JavaScript Snippet image

The problem is that it isn't only used for JavaScript code. Myself and many others use the code snippet functionality a lot when answering HTML and CSS questions which feature no JavaScript at all. The phrase JavaScript snippet simply doesn't work in those cases.

Perhaps this should be renamed to "HTML/CSS/JavaScript snippet" or "Website code snippet" instead - something which doesn't make it sound like its only use is for JavaScript code.

In answers, perhaps the button could be hidden completely when the question isn't tagged with , or , as well as , , or which are options within the code snippet interface.

* {
 transition: 0.5s;
}
html, body {
 height: 100%;
 margin: 0;
}
body {
 font-size: 108px;
 text-align: center;
}
body:hover {
 background: black;
}
body:hover span {
 color: white;
}
<span>&#9785;</span>

asked Jul 7, 2015 at 12:43
16
  • 35
    Better than "code snippet", which is what is was. And caused people to use it for every other language under the sun. Commented Jul 7, 2015 at 12:45
  • 3
    What do you do when someone askes a new question? It isn't tagged yet - do you hide the button or not? Commented Jul 7, 2015 at 12:48
  • 2
    @Oded I hadn't considered that. That could still apply to answers though, as I'm sure it isn't only misused in questions. I've updated the post. Commented Jul 7, 2015 at 12:50
  • 1
    @Oded also I'm not arguing that it isn't better than "code snippet", I'm pointing out that it has more uses than just JavaScript, but "JavaScript snippet" implies that its sole purpose is for JavaScript code. Commented Jul 7, 2015 at 13:18
  • 7
    I don't like "Website code snippet" because that still doesn't make it clear that it's not for languages like PHP. Maybe "HTML/CSS/JS snippet" if they decide to change it again. Commented Jul 7, 2015 at 14:48
  • 13
    I vote for Insert self-contained runnable working client side website code snippet Commented Jul 7, 2015 at 15:24
  • Well, that's a bit too long. Maybe "client-side web snippet "? Commented Jul 7, 2015 at 19:26
  • 12
    Web snippet (but not for languages like PHP) Commented Jul 8, 2015 at 6:36
  • I'd say copy the functionality of ideone to support every language and change it back to "code snippet". You cannot support absolutely everything, libraries and maybe shaders are hard, but some C, C++, Java and Python would go a long way. Commented Jul 8, 2015 at 6:46
  • Why not just have a checkbox at the bottom of the window for runnable then have a <select> tag for each code block's language? Commented Jul 8, 2015 at 7:02
  • How about "Fiddle"? That's what many people have taken to calling these things anyway regardless of whether they're actually hosted on jsfiddle.net. Commented Jul 8, 2015 at 14:34
  • 7
    @BoltClock - The problem with that is there's a SQLFiddle too so just calling it a Fiddle still doesn't imply it's only for HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. Commented Jul 8, 2015 at 15:42
  • 7
    It's also a stupid name. Commented Jul 8, 2015 at 19:19
  • 2
    Nice JavaScript snippet! Commented Jul 9, 2015 at 16:41
  • 1
    trippy snippet man. Cool! Commented Jul 9, 2015 at 17:16

3 Answers 3

67

My suggestion:

  • Live demo (HTML/CSS/JS only)

It makes clear what languages are supported, and is a clear indication that this is not just a "code snippet" or "code block" feature but an actual demonstration tool that will require language support to run.

It's also pithy. :)

answered Jul 8, 2015 at 13:05
4
  • 5
    This. Why obscure what it really is behind words like Client-side? Last I checked, I could run Java applets on the client, flash on the client, etc (although not as much as before, of course). Commented Jul 8, 2015 at 19:15
  • 2
    +1. Explicit is better than implicit, as the Python folks like to say. Commented Jul 10, 2015 at 10:08
  • Looks like this has now been accepted, so I've gone ahead and accepted this answer. Nice idea! Commented Jul 14, 2015 at 9:39
  • Whooo get in​​​ Commented Jul 14, 2015 at 9:45
10

(FWIW, I prefer Lightness Races in Orbit's to this. This is much clunkier.)

Wording suggestions:

  • Client-side web snippet (HTML, CSS, JS)
  • Runnable client-side web snippet (HTML, CSS, JS)
  • Live client-side web snippet (HTML, CSS, JS)

I wouldn't hide the button if the question isn't tagged, because a lot of people (possibly most) write the question first then add tags.

But a check as of when they're posting would make sense. That's been requested in various forms here, here, and here (at least).

answered Jul 8, 2015 at 7:02
3
  • It might be useful in a small number of non-front end situations as well. I can think of some questions like "How do I duplicate this HTML/CSS functionality in some GUI framework?" as one. Commented Jul 8, 2015 at 12:29
  • 1
    Perhaps we could move the tag entry box to the top when writing a new question to encourage tags first? Commented Jul 8, 2015 at 13:11
  • @MattWilko: I think that's a good idea regardless. I've said it before, too! Commented Jul 8, 2015 at 13:12
5

Back in the day the convention was to call this DHTML. It meant HTML, CSS & Javascript running in a browser environment. The D stands for Dynamic. I still think it's a very useful term.

answered Jul 9, 2015 at 17:54
1
  • 1
    It is indeed a really usefull term, and one I'm particulary fond of. The problem is that in my experience lots of people don't have a clue of what it means. Perhaps we bring it back to life? Commented Jul 10, 2015 at 8:31

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.