I'm using fb:like/share/send etc within a variety of different apps/sites sometimes where the buttons are called to render several times, for example on a store with multiple items.
Problem is the like buttons are horribly bloaty. I'm using xfbml vers but there seems to be constant redirection going on in the background. With the buttons commented out, page renders snappy and nice, uncomment the like buttons and everything grinds to a veritable halt.
I've seem some blackhat solutions for obscuring the buttons etc. but all i'm really after is simply a lighter-weight like solution. Does anyone know of any way you can call 'like' from the api so that it might be attached to an event and cut-out fb's horrible solution?
I use the deprecated Share method, which adds one line of HTML and small image to my pages. This is important to me. My blog is used by many older people with slow machines, slow Internet connections and obsolete browsers. So I keep my pages small and simple.
I tried switching to the Like button, but it pages took 5 or even 10 times as long to load.
So no answer, I'm afraid - aside from sticking with Share. But supporting your call for a lighter weight Like button. A small image, half a dozen lines of HTML and the option of no additional server call would be great.
Related
I am using Ember 3.0 at the moment. Wrote my first lines of code in ANY language about 1 year ago (I switched careers from something totally unrelated to development), but I quickly took to ember. So, not a ton of experience, but not none. I am writing a multi-tenant site which will include about 20 different sites, all with one Ember frontend and a RubyOnRails backend. I am about 75% done with the front end, now just loading content into it. I haven’t started on the backend yet, one, because I don’t have MUCH experience with backend stuff, and two, because I haven’t needed it yet. My sites will be informational to begin with and I’ll build it up from there.
So. I am trying to implement a news feed on my site. I need it to pull in multiple rss feeds, perhaps dozens, filtered by keyword, and display them on my site. I’ve been scouring the web for days just trying to figure out where to get started. I was thinking of writing a service that parses the incoming xml, I tried using a third party widget (which I DON’T really want to do. Everything on my site so far has been built from scratch and I’d like to keep it that way), but in using these third party systems I get some random cross domain errors and node-child errors which only SOMETIMES pop up. Anyway, I’d like to write this myself, if possible, since I’m trying to learn (and my brain is wired to do the code myself - the only way it sticks with me).
Ultimately, every google result I read says RSS feeds are easy to implement. I don’t know where I’m going wrong, but I’m simply looking for:
1: An “Ember-way” starting point. 2: Is this possible without a backend? 3: Do I have to use a third party widget/aggregator? 4: Whatever else you think might help on the subject.
Any help would be appreciated. Here in New Hampshire, there are basically no resources, no meetings, nothing. Thanks for any help.
Based on the results I get back when searching on this topic, it looks like you’ll get a few snags if you try to do this in the browser:
CORS header issues (sounds like you’ve already hit this)
The joy of working with XML in JavaScript (that just might be sarcasm 😉, it’s actually unlikely to be fun)
If your goal is to do this as a learning exercise, then doing it Javascript/Ember will definitely help you learn lots of new things. You might start with this article as a jumping off point: https://www.raymondcamden.com/2015/12/08/parsing-rss-feeds-in-javascript-options/
However, if you want to have this be maintainable for the long run and want things to go quickly and smoothly, I would highly recommend moving the RSS parsing system into your backend and feeding simple data out to Ember. There are enough gotchas and complexities to RSS feeds over time that using a battle-tested library is going to be your best way to stay sane. And loading that type of library up in Ember (while quite doable) will end up increasing your application size. You will avoid all those snags (and more I’m probably not thinking of) if you move your parsing back to the server ...
I have recently implemented some data visualisation using d3.js, I'm now trying to get this to work for Internet Explorer browser versions 7 and above. The common suggestion to get this to work, is to combine d3.js with raphael.js, which is a cross browser graphics library.
There already seem to be some implementations of such libraries such as
r2d3.js :
d34raphael.js :
I'm trying to understand if these existing implementation already have d3's capability of data binding and the physics implementation of the force layout to implement something as simple as this d3 example : http://bl.ocks.org/1095795
I have been looking into this too and a number of options came up.
Chrome Frame - A browser plug-in that actually uses chrome underneath, meaning SVG just works. This is great if you're able to deploy plugins to the browser, for a real commercial environment however this may not be possible.
SVG Web - The aim is it bring SVG to all browsers. It looks like a fairly large project, one that's had Google's input. This doesn't however work out of the box with D3 though I don't know much about the issues.
D34Raphael - You've mentioned this one, I found again it doesn't work out of the box. Check the project out on GitHub, there hasn't been any commit activity in months and there's some pull requests "first pass on trying to get support for .on() required for event binding". If it doesn't support events, is that an issue to you? I'd generally keep away from this one.
R2D3 - Again another one you mentioned. I took the Sankey example from the D3 website and had to make a few changes to get it working. The main things I couldn't get working (Drag Events, Groups - though can use an alternative). It took about a day of effort to get the example working in IE8 and I believe is in a useable state. The project on GitHub is also much more active, the developer is committing, pulling work in and is very active on discussions etc. This gets my vote.
I am doing some web data classification task and was thinking if I could get the co-ordinates of html elements as they would appear on a web-browser without taking into consideration any css or javascript being referred in the web page.
My language of programming is c++ and the need results for a couple million of pages, so it has to be fast. I know there is a Microsoft COM component which renders the page in a web browser control and then can be queried for position of different html tags. But this is not suitable in my case as it first renders the whole page which takes up a lot of time.
So as I found out, there are open-source layout engines WebKit, Gecko that can probably be used for this. But that's a huge piece of code and I need someone to direct me to the right classes or right modules to look into or any previous/similar work someone has done previously. Also, please let me know what you guys think is a good choice if I want to customize the existing code for use with multiple threads to make it faster.
Thanks
Generally, you would find that different page rendering engines do render the html in their own way and the results will differ.
The thing is that if you stick to any concrete browser engine, what you are to do is somehow bringing this engine into your project and using engine's interface to retrieve these coordinates. Kind of a tough task though, simply because you'll have to read a lot of documentation and crawl through thousands of files.
I think that right approach would be posting this task in some place, that is specific for the page rendering engine you've chosen. (gecko/webkit/...)
If you prefer sticking to something MS-specific, guess it's gonna be easier, but can't help you with something like class names or code chunks that you want to see. Probably somebody else could guide you in this case.
I'm trying to put a workable plan together for a charity that could really make good use of a forum and a wiki, but a crucial part of its operations happen in parts of the world where dial-up connection dominates and probably will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
This site was recommended as one that behaves well even on a dial-up connection, so I thought I'd ask for some help here!
The site I want to hook this on to is using Drupal. Anyone out there with experiences like this who could maybe help?
Behaving well on dial-up involves sitting down and optimizing your HTML, CSS, and images to be as small as possible, and then ensuring that your server is sending sane HTTP headers for caching. Make sure your CSS stylesheet is external, and shared across all pages. If dial-up is a major issue, you'll want to stick to a single stylesheet if possible. Avoid JavaScript, because those computers usually don't have the processing power for it either. If you must use JavaScript, jQuery is extremely small and very fast and highly recommended, but I suspect that for most content-oriented websites, it won't be necessary.
To be honest, if you produce valid XHTML/HTML5, valid CSS, and you follow all of the usual best practices for standards-based web design (no table layouts, semantic markup, etc), dial-up really won't be an issue. It'll just work.
To tweak the maximum performance out of your site you might want to install this and use it on your site when you are done with the initial development- ySlow - this will analyse your pages and highlight all the areas you can improve. It's really a great tool for optimising site download speeds.
You should be able to accomplish this, but to be honest you are going to loose a lot in the way of user experience by creating a dial-up friendly site. It basically means you have to do the following to optimize for the experience:
Keep JS to a minimum
Make sure the JS is minified.
Reduce large image requirements w/ CSS and some optimal planning of layout
Make sure caching is enabled in the headers so that new files only get downloaded when nessisary.
If you do all this, you should have a site that is acceptable on dialup.
There are already some hints on how to keep page sizes and load times down.
To complement this, you could use a software that simulates limited bandwith. This helps you test the speed of your site on dialup.
There are several available (just google "simulate dialup").
Sloppy e.g. seems quite usable.
You could also do what Google does for Gmail, i.e. provide 2 versions of your view, one for slow connections that uses plain old HTML, and one for faster connections. You could make the default one the slow one, but provide a link to enable the faster one.
Gmail also has a built-in mechanism that detects when you load the page whether it's going fast or not and will automatically revert to the plain HTML view if it's too slow, which is another fancier alternative.
Your main goal should be minimum page size (keep only HTML in pages, all styling information should be externalized in css files for caching, same for JavaScript in js files) and minimum round trips to server (full requests and post backs). Contrary to popular belief a JS heavy site could work like a charm if you perform a lot of heavy duty client side and keep the server roundtrips clean with the minimum amount of data needed (think JQuery and AJAX here with small partial renderings).
P.S. If u'r using .NET throw ViewState away.
What is best way for making a draw panel in a web page. I would like to know how to develop something very simple,for example little panel where users can draw a signature.
This is great example drawhere.com, but I need something way simpler.
Thanks
Whilst Zifre's answer is valid in one sense, I would be very weary of the <canvas> tag, at least at the moment, due to there not being fantastic support for it (as many browsers don't yet fully support HTML5).
Some browsers support it (most notably Firefox and anything running on Webkit), but swathes of others don't (especially older browsers). It's perhaps better to go for a more universal solution (though, by no means completely universal), and use something like Flash.
The easiest way to do this is probably with the <canvas> tag and some JavaScript. Here is a really simple example to get you started. You can add more functions for things like circles, boxes, etc.
I'm sure somebody has already made something like this that you could use, but I couldn't find any.