Dedicated ticket for the issue I raised in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T60137#10414764 onwards.
**Use case**
* When using MobileFronted, the whole footer is trimmed down. A "Terms of Use" link is removed, but since it is important, it is added back to the remaining footer links.
**Problem**
* Some CSS is applied to move this link to the first position. That CSS is a `float:left`, which I itched on.
**First attempt at solving**
* These two associated patches: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/mediawiki/core/+/1105977 + https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/mediawiki/extensions/MobileFrontend/+/1105978
However, the approach of these patches is not satisfying enough.
**Next attempts**
I suggested two alternatives here: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/mediawiki/extensions/MobileFrontend/+/1105978/comments/bc634123_2dd654dc
>**Alternative 1:**
>Use the following, arguably cleaner, CSS:
>```css
>#footer-place {
> display: flex;
>}
>#footer-places-terms-use {
> order: -1;
>}
>```
>References:
>- [[ https://stackoverflow.com/questions/39217732/is-it-possible-to-change-the-order-of-list-items-using-css3 | Is it possible to change the order of list items using CSS3? ]] on Stack Overflow
>- [[ https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/CSS_flexible_box_layout/Ordering_flex_items | Ordering flex items ]] on MDN
>- [[ https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/order | order CSS property ]] on MDN
>**Alternative 2:**
>Considering that these footer links are probably seldom used, just don't tweak the order, and make it do with "Terms of Use" coming after "Privacy policy".
* @Jdlrobson [[ https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/mediawiki/extensions/MobileFrontend/+/1105978/comments/bc634123_2dd654dc | stated ]] he does want the "Terms of Use" link to be displayed first. This rules out alternative 2.
* He suggested to consider augmenting the [[ https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Hooks/SkinAddFooterLinks | relevant hook ]], to let tweak the order of the elements (refs [[ https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/mediawiki/core/+/1105977/comment/68a73bf7_e0aca1b1/ | message ]]). I'm not sure it would be worth the hassle, and the code complexification (refs [[ https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T60137#10419983 | message ]]). But for sure, I'm not planning to look into it…
* The remaining solution would be my alternative 1, which makes use of flex's `order` property.