Problems with nav_footer_custom

[motrellin]

Yesterday, I updated just-the-docs-gem to 0.8.2. Today, I noticed the absence of the search bar at our website built with just-the-docs. In addition, the search bar appears on the mobile version of the site, but if you click it, you end at the just-the-docs-website.

We tested this issue in multiple browsers (at least two: firefox and Brave). In addition, I tested, whether earlier versions of our site have the search bar (they don't).

Does anyone have an idea, what to do?
Here is our source code: https://github.com/FLBadoras/wiki (the main branch contains the source of our website)

[pdmosses]

@motrellin The problem with the search bar appears to be due to the contents of https://github.com/FLBadoras/wiki/blob/main/_includes/nav_footer_custom.html

This file contains the <footer> tag, which apparently results in (probably invalid) HTML that confuses the styling.

Suitable content for this custom file is currently unclear from the theme docs, but try replacing the content initially by text. The search bar should then appear on your site.

[motrellin]

Thanks @pdmosses , the search bar does indeed appear.

It seems like the <footer> tag didn't cause the problem, but a missing closing </a>...

After adding it, it works as intended.

So, in the end, thanks again.

[pdmosses]

It seems like the <footer> tag didn't cause the problem, but a missing closing </a>...

Right! I was mistakenly looking at the inclusion of footer-custom.html in footer.html, which is where the <footer> tag should not be used; the file nav_footer_custom.html is included by components/sidebar.html, and the <footer> tag is indeed needed there. 🙄 Good that you were able to diagnose and fix the actual cause of the HTML problem yourself.

@just-the-docs/maintainers AFAIK, this difference between the permissible contents of footer-custom.html and nav_footer_custom.html isn't currently mentioned in the docs for Override includes. Moreover, the existence of such a difference seems inherently confusing, and it would be good to eliminate it in a future release (preferably together with a more general improvement of the organisation and docs for custom includes).

[mattxwang]

AFAIK, this difference between the permissible contents of footer-custom.html and nav_footer_custom.html isn't currently mentioned in the docs for Override includes. Moreover, the existence of such a difference seems inherently confusing, and it would be good to eliminate it in a future release (preferably together with a more general improvement of the organisation and docs for custom includes).

Agreed! Especially as there are many "hidden" constraints. The backlog grows...