I have managed to have a Checkbox on the first line of a Block with a Markdown Trick that allows me to have an empty, null-pointing URL that occupies the first line of the block. On the second line I place the actual Checkbox but, because the first line is empty, it gets “drawn” on the first line actually achieving a Checkbox similar to a TODO checkbox:
- (.checkbox " #movieGenre ")
* [ ]
The only caveat is that I get now two bullets and it is not aesthetically appealing. Is there a way, with a custom CSS to hide the bullet of the Checkbox?
I would like to get rid, with CSS, if possible, of the characters after the Block Bullet. I am not sure what whitespace characters are there, I assume a tab and the bullet itself. Can it be done with CSS?
As a side-note, I am trying to achieve this because Checkboxes are not Primitives in Logseq and because I am using atm TODOs to fill in for the need of a checkbox, which is nok as it’s polluting my TODO queries so, until I will be able to define a TODO Workflow that says “Checkbox” > “DONE” I have to rely on this hack. I have already REGEXed my whole graph to replace the TODOs that are just placeholders for Checkboxes (fortunately, I have them added by templates and it was easy).
Off, Hiicup/Closure … too advanced stuff for me. I am no developer. Plus, I share my markdown files with a team, I have to have full Markdown compatibility, hence my fierce activity and demand to the Logseq devs/decision makers to at least support standard markdown to the bone and at least leave me the option to embed other features like Logseq Pages ([[ ]]) in Markdown Links by default or let me have properties inside some other Markup structures.
Then you can use <a></a>: Markdown supports HTML tag since its first version. [:a] is just a more compact way to type that.
In my opinion, Markdown is too limited to support Logseq features. They should move to Djot instead, it’s 90% like Markdown but with additional features and it’s by the author of Pandoc and Commonmark.
For who is interested, here there are some ideas about Logseq+Djot:
For the features that I use I can solve everything with Markdown.
Properties can be embedded in Markdown Links:
# the properties embedded in markdown links and title text are only in the backend, in the markdown files on disc;
- Some Block Line 1
(.property "property1:: value1")
(.property "property2:: value2")
Text goes here
# in the front-end (in-app) Logseq still renders them with just what is between the quotation marks:
# nothing changes for the user
Logseq Pages can be used with markdown links:
[Logseq-Page-Name-Here](../Relative-PAth-to-File-on-Disk " [[ Logseq-Page-Name-Here ]] " ) #this is in the back-end (in the Markdown file)
[[Logseq-Page-Name-Here]] # this is what shows in Logseq (nothing changes)
I agree with you on that. I believe they use double colon as it’s very rare that it occurs naturally in normal text;
I would still use:
Some Block Line 1
so that there is nothing ambiguous about what that is. It’s a property. And this can become so many things if you replace property with something else a script or Logseq itself has as a standard way of communicating stuff. I would use “.meta” for hidden metadata, “.note” to send notes to another team member for document reviewing, etc.
As long as Markdown is widely adopted and until some other text-based framewrk gets to that adoption rate, I believe we should try to work with what we have. For myself, Markdown drop would be catastrophic and I would have to look elsewhere.
Regarding CSS to hide one bullet from the two that are rendered when doing this trick, I am thinking how would it differentiate between the bullets? Most renderers will show a different bullet stye for an indented bullet but I am not sure there is a way to tell, via CSS, that one of the bullets should be hidden or something like that…
It should hide bullet points for all *-list elements, including those without checkboxes. To restrict this to lists with checkboxes only I need the latest Logseq release that I haven’t at the moment, I will try again in a few days.
Yes, this works to hide ALL List bullets. However, I only want to hide the bullets from Lists that also have checkboxes, either * [ ] or * [X]. How will this be possible in a future release of Logseq? :-/
I raised an eyebrow regarding my empty-looking custom.css when I pasted the code above. Now I wanted to undo those changes to get back my bullets for all list items and I also noticed that my TODOs have both the Checkbox and the TODO text visible. I remembered that I had some custom css to hide the TODO and maybe some other css I can’t remember. Is it possible that 0.9.10 has a bug in showing the custom.css or overwriting it if you add some custom css to an empty-looking in-app custom.css?
Where is this file on disk, I can’t seem to find it.