FYI, I have removed the red double quote graphic from the <blockquote> element.

The styling was nice when if the post has a giant block of text. However since the new design launched, I noticed there has been many cases where smaller blockquotes were used in a single post. The graphic in each small blockquote made the page very busy and distracting.

see below:

Blockquote style before

I believe the removal of the graphic aids to better readability.

  • 1
    Eeeek! Where is the giant red quote? – F'x Apr 27 '11 at 9:46
  • For those who missed nohat's tirade. – MrHen Apr 27 '11 at 14:47
  • 1
    Lots of questions and answers that had some actual quoted text were edited in the past to remove then-"superfluous" block quotes. Now, there is no way for the user to know what was actually quoted. Many hundreds of answers edited by users such as myself, kiamlaluno, Jimi Oke, and F'x are probably affected. This change is not "minor". – Uticensis Apr 27 '11 at 16:11
  • 5
    I disagree. Being indented in a block quote is being quoted. – nohat Apr 27 '11 at 16:21
  • 3
    -1 for me. I'll explain why: I understand about the message "possible duplicate", there it's not a quotation or something similar. But in answers it was really useful when you quoted dictionaries, or examples taken from dictionaries. – Alenanno Apr 28 '11 at 9:50

I don't think there was any reason to do that; I'm really not in favor of this change. I liked the red quotes, as I think regular quotation marks don't really "bring out" the word or excerpt from the background, and in fact inhibit readability. Now we're going to have to start using them to properly note direct quotations. I don't think anybody complained about these red quote marks in proper blockquotes — we complained only about their use in POSSIBLE DUPLICATE, at the top of the page. Why can't just that be fixed?

  • 3
    I strongly agree with Billare. I'll add another point: now, the blockquote styling is pale yellow over paler yellow, which is clearly not good for drawing attention! – F'x Apr 27 '11 at 9:46
  • +1 Add me to the "agreement". They looked even better with the quote marks. Now it's just a darker yellow rectangle. – Alenanno Apr 27 '11 at 10:46
  • 1
    I personally would only be interested in having them back only if there were a way to specifically request them for a specific blockquote. Many <blockquote>s on the site—not just duplicate question messages—are not quotations and are wrong or misleading in addition to being cluttered if they have giant quotation marks on them. – nohat Apr 27 '11 at 15:42
  • 1
    @Nohat: people abuse an otherwise useful feature, and you want to remove the feature. Talk about shooting oneself in the foot! – F'x Apr 27 '11 at 19:08
  • @F'x: In this case, "people" would be the system itself. – MrHen Apr 27 '11 at 19:34

Can we get a border or background change to make the distinction between quoted and non-quoted easier to see?

  • Pretty please, yes! Please make this blockquoted element contrast more with the background, as is done on other SE sites. – F'x Apr 27 '11 at 19:29
  • 3
    I have added a faint top and bottom border around the blockquote. the change will be in the next deployment. – Jin Apr 27 '11 at 22:41
  • 1
    @Jin: Awesome, thank you. – MrHen Apr 27 '11 at 22:59
  • @Jin: In case you care, I think the new border looks great. :) Thanks again. – MrHen Apr 28 '11 at 14:40

Thank you Jin!

Not only were they often cluttersome, they were often just plain wrong, as when <blockquote> tags were used for things that weren't technically block quotes, such as the duplicate question message, and in many questions and answers, where often examples which are not really quotations are set off using <blockquote>, as in the example in the question here.

The fact that they are indented is all the extra attention <blockquote>s need. The different background color is extra attention-drawing (which is fine) but certainly not necessary for the purpose of the tag. The giant quotation mark was way over the top, making <blockquote>s stand out too much, especially when there were several of them.

  • 2
    I disagree that it mattered within answers that ordinary blockquotes weren't direct quotations. The red quotation mark, I felt, served as a visual anchor, directing one's attention to the most important "meat" of the post, in examples, and was very useful in improving readability. It also added a little character to our site; I personally hate the yellow blockquotes on the Sketchy theme, and love ours for what it did. – Uticensis Apr 27 '11 at 15:49
  • 1
    Moreover, significant numbers of questions have been edited by prolific editors such as myself, kiamlaluno, and F'x to format questions so that they would read nicely, and with the red quotes in mind, we deleted superfluous quotation marks from quoted text. Jin has essentially destroyed all that hard work with one stroke. Note also that the MAIN complaint was about one tiny little "possible duplicate" block; no one was complaining about the main ones. Why would anyone change something that a 1000 answers were written with in mind so that one could save work on one little thing? – Uticensis Apr 27 '11 at 15:50
  • (That I didn't personally care all that much about) – Uticensis Apr 27 '11 at 15:57
  • 5
    The quotation marks within blockquotes were superfluous regardless of whether the giant decorative quotation mark was present. It was purely decorative, as being indented in a block quote serves the same role as quotation marks do in running text, so your work was not in vain—it was and still is useful. – nohat Apr 27 '11 at 16:12

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .