css: update selectors for odig package title

[katrinafyi]

this is for the package index pages with the titles that look like: Package angstrom 0.16.1 issues more….

it appears that the new heading structure is something like this:

<header class="odoc-preamble">
  <h1 id="package-angstrom">
    <a href="#package-angstrom" class="anchor"></a>
    Package angstrom
    <span class="version">0.16.1</span>
    <nav>
      <a href="https://github.com/inhabitedtype/angstrom/issues">issues</a>
      <a href="#package_info">more…</a>
    </nav>
  </h1>

notably, the h1 element doesn't have a .package classname anymore which breaks the styling, reverting the version and links to the large title text size.

the new selectors are borrowed from the odig css.
https://github.com/b0-system/odig/blob/b0e7b144d921d345d49cf4958caab06059739754/themes/odoc.css#L293-L297

[jonludlam]

Perhaps @dbuenzli would like to weigh in here?

[dbuenzli]

I think a bit more context may be needed. With:

> odoc --version
2.4.4
> odig --version
v0.0.9

and odig odoc-theme set odoc-default I see this:

and (for example) odig odoc-theme set odig.default I see this:

I guess @katrinafyi wants to get rid of these oversized links.

A blame on the mentioned lines seems to indicate that the change in odig's odoc.css happened between 4-6 years ago.

I'd say it's not to me to tell what odoc's theme should look like. Perhaps @katrinafyi can make a before/after screenshot to make it easier to odoc's dev to vouch the changes ?

(I'm sorry but css selectors of odig is the last thing I have in my head, well css selectors in general so it's diffcult for me to say, yes this is it :-), also just in case here's the .mld/raw html code that generates these bits.)

[katrinafyi]

Hello, thank you both for your comments! Sorry for being a bit short on detail.

Here are the before and after screenshots, both built with odig v0.0.9.

before:

after:

I found that the .package nav and .package .version selectors didn't exist within the current HTML, so I assumed they were meant to match an old version of these elements. I phrased the PR in this way, but from the git blame maybe this is not the case - sorry for any confusion.

In any case, I would like the version and links to be made more distinct from the package title. If the current style is the intended odoc style, I can make the changes in a custom theme :)

[jonludlam]

Thanks both. It seems slightly weird to me that we've got CSS rules that don't apply to anything constructed by this repo, but relatively harmless. I'm happy to merge this, though could I ask @katrinafyi to write a quick changelog entry for it?

[katrinafyi]

I've added an entry under the "added" section. Hopefully the wording is okay :)

[jonludlam]

Thanks!