XF 2.1 How do I replicate this code block

[Jon12345]

I want to use the same code add-on that is used by the site as seen in this thread: https://www.mrexcel.com/board/threa...tive-workbook-delete-closed-workbook.1122524/

Any idea what is used? I see there is a copy icon in the top right.

I am aware of the add-on Code 2.1.2, but I want to know what is used on that site.

 

[Jon12345]

The Xenforo developer said in a thread here that scrolling horizontally for code is fine, it is Google who has it wrong. The thing is, if you don't have mobile friendly pages, they penalise you in the search rankings for mobile.

 

[Max Taxable]

But when I go to the link in the first post, their site also has a scrolling issue.

Interestingly, so does your forum home page. Quite confusing.

Overview | Lighthouse | Chrome for Developers

Learn how to set up Lighthouse to audit your web apps.

search.google.com

 

[Jon12345]

Tried another one on their site, page with code picked at random: https://search.google.com/test/mobile-friendly?id=t-xCEKx7GMB8i8FfoDqhoA

Mobile friendly.

I'm wondering if the code in their code block looks less densely packed, and maybe that is considered bad for mobile. I am really referring to linespacing.

 

[Max Taxable]

The Xenforo developer said in a thread here that scrolling horizontally for code is fine

So we're left with "Clickable elements too close together" to work on.

 

[Jon12345]

Yes, they like my forum home page. I am trying to narrow down what it could be. There is something they are doing over there that satisfied the Google appetite!

 

[Jon12345]

Or the code block! Did I say that before?

 

[Jon12345]

To be clear, the Xenforo developer was arguing that he thought it was fine, not that Google thought it was fine.

 

[Max Taxable]

Or the code block! Did I say that before?

Something IN the code, in the "Code Block." Is giving you this: "Clickable elements too close together"

I am really referring to linespacing.

That's only relevant to the human eye.

 

[Jon12345]

We may be converging on the same thing. i.e. the target is the code block. I doubt it is the text itself, but rather the formatting that the code block has. That is if it is something inside the code block. It might not be. The difference that strikes me is line density.

 

[Jon12345]

I think Google factors in what is relevant to the human eye. It is all about user experience.

 

[Max Taxable]

The difference that strikes me is line density.

That's only noticed by the human eye.

"Clickable elements too close together" is the only issue that I see. That's not due to density or lack thereof in the code, that's in rendering.

 

[Max Taxable]

I think Google factors in what is relevant to the human eye.

LOL

Okay, have fun.

Human eye sees what is rendered on the page. Computers see the code. It does not matter to the computer if the code has white space in it, or if it is very dense. It doesn't affect page rendering.

 

[Jon12345]

This has a code block but only one line of code in each: https://search.google.com/test/mobile-friendly?id=S3aNHn4_pwfjoUABKlaJMw

I can do a test. Create a code block with 2 lines of code one after the other, and another thread with 2 lines but with one line spacing between them.

 

[djbaxter]

The thing is, if you don't have mobile friendly pages, they penalise you in the search rankings for mobile.

They would not do that for one or two forum pages if the main landing page and most of the pages are okay.

Also, that "elements too close together" is a very common false positive I've posted about before. You get that if they object to anything on the page - and even if they don't object to anything else.

I have repeatedly demonstrated that it's bogus this way: Don't change anything on the page where that is the only reported issue, but go into Search Console and click the Fixed button. Google will say it's started analyzing and a couple or a few days later you'll get a notification saying it's okay now - even though you changed nothing.

 

[Jon12345]

Overview | Lighthouse | Chrome for Developers

Learn how to set up Lighthouse to audit your web apps.

search.google.com

Mobile friendly with two lines next to each other. Hmm.

 

[djbaxter]

Overview | Lighthouse | Chrome for Developers

Learn how to set up Lighthouse to audit your web apps.

search.google.com

Mobile friendly with two lines next to each other. Hmm.

Did you notice this? Click on the part with the yellow exlamation mark and you get this:

Page partially loaded
Not all page resources could be loaded. This can affect how Google sees and understands your page. Fix availability problems for any resources that can affect how Google understands your page.

 

[Jon12345]

I think that blocking is due to ad code. That page was still mobile friendly.

Edit: Perhaps they deliberately block the ad code for the tests.

 

[Jon12345]

Let me test something, to see if I can make the mobile friendly page unfriendly, just by playing around with what is in the code block.

 

[Jon12345]

Ok, longer lines of code = not mobile friendly: https://search.google.com/test/mobile-friendly?id=jQ4Tr6lAHq8o6df-uHZ7CQ

Same page, still just 2 lines of code, but longer lines of code, and you get a fail.

 

[Jon12345]

Ok, I played around with the width of the code, increasing and reducing it. That seems to be key to making the page mobile friendly or not. So, a mobile responsive code block with wrapping text would solve it. Unless there is another solution.

What is odd is that the website I linked to in my first post has wide text but still mobile friendly. This brings me back to my original conclusion is that it is down to the type of code block used.