|
McGlockenshire posted:I'm looking for modern, maintained Javascript libraries to perform data binding (the synchronization of an object with HTML elements or values) and related UI-centric operations. I'm not looking for tools to build a single-page application. I'd go with Vue as I've used it with PHP/Laravel for a long time now and really like it. Whats stopping you from using Vue or Rivets?
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 10:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:38 |
|
|
kedo posted:How many of you design/develop on Windows? At my job pretty much all the developers preferred development on Linux. They gave us windows laptops, so we just installed virtualbox for the development tools to work side by side with whatever crap had to run in windows.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
Is there some up-to-date guide on compiling to WebAssembly? The one on the official site just says use emcc -s WASM=1 with the Emscripten SDK but doing that outputs some incredibly old version of the format that doesn't even have the same header.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Using CSS I'm trying to display a list of items - with a max height so there is a scrollbar - with a variable width based upon the content - with each item using flexbox and and an icon aligned to the right code:On Firefox, the list's width expands and "cuts off" the text early, as if the icon isn't even there. What can I do to make Firefox behave the same as Chrome and expand out the list all the way? https://jsfiddle.net/5wdfm9ks/
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
Heskie posted:Whats stopping you from using Vue or Rivets? Oh, nothing, I just want more alternatives so I have a better idea of what to look into. Depressing Box posted:For what it's worth, you can use React in plain JS, without JSX/ES6/compiling/etc. Also good to know, thank you. Other recommendations I've gotten so far include Ractive and Knockout. I tried Knockout once and hated it, but I don't think I knew what I was doing back then and might give it another go, though it looks like it does more than I want.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
OneEightHundred posted:Is there some up-to-date guide on compiling to WebAssembly? According to the emscripten guy you need to use an older version of binaryen or just use the nightly browser versions (Chrome Canary etc.) which accept newer(?) WebAssembly formats (assuming I'm getting the same error you're getting). (the moral I'm taking from the story is so far is, don't compile to WebAssembly, it's not ready yet)
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
Dreadrush posted:Using CSS I'm trying to display a list of items This looks identical to me in Chrome and Firefox. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
Dreadrush posted:Using CSS I'm trying to display a list of items Your flex-grow and flex-shrink settings are redundant wrt. the defaults for a flex element and your .text elements will never overflow without a set max-width (and possibly some width restriction on the parent?) because that's how flex elements work, as I understand them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
Lumpy posted:No, it's because we're all jerks talking about modern front end stuff in the modern front end thread. I'd have suggested React Router, but there wasn't enough info to make a guess at what the rest of his code looked like. Late on the reply but you're proving my point, I'm not recommending react-router if he's not using react.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
I am working on a website for a music school and the required functionality is to allow teachers to set their availability (for example Mon-Fri 9-5 pm). Students should then be able to view availability by teacher in a calendar format and book a lesson within the allowed times. Any suggestions for an API which can accomplish this which is free or cheap? I was planning on using Google Calendar API but they do not really provide the functionality I am looking for unless I use a Work/School account which charges per user. The website is being built with Spring MVC.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
I dislike Wordpress/PHP so much and I've luckily avoided doing the sort of work that would have clients asking for it or something similar....until now. I've been looking at alternatives and came across Mezzanine. Anyone have any opinions on it? It's mostly appealing to me because it's built with Django and I've got a lot of experience with that and I like python.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
What's up with SSL certificate vendors making claims about the cheap certificates being ideal for low traffic sites? Are they just trying to push customers toward expensive "enterprise" stuff? Or would a sudden spike in traffic somehow affect the user experience due to my choice of a $10 certificate? I have no idea how these things work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
rt4 posted:What's up with SSL certificate vendors making claims about the cheap certificates being ideal for low traffic sites? Are they just trying to push customers toward expensive "enterprise" stuff?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
kedo posted:This looks identical to me in Chrome and Firefox. Munkeymon posted:Your flex-grow and flex-shrink settings are redundant wrt. the defaults for a flex element and your .text elements will never overflow without a set max-width (and possibly some width restriction on the parent?) because that's how flex elements work, as I understand them. Edit: Looks like a lot of this can be removed - I am just using display: inline-block with a max-height here. It seems on Chrome it accounts for the scrollbar being there, but on Firefox it doesn't? https://jsfiddle.net/ad10cfro/ This is what I see on Windows and also Ubuntu: Ubuntu/Windows Chrome  Ubuntu/Windows Firefox 
Dreadrush fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Nov 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Dreadrush posted:The .icon class can actually be removed. It seems on Chrome it accounts for the scrollbar being there, but on Firefox it doesn't? Pretty sure that red thing in your screenshot is the scroll handle. Looks to me like Chrome computes the content size and then adds the width of the scroll bar to the outside of the element's content area where FF takes it away from the inner content after computing the size based on the content. You could try explicitly setting box-sizing, but that's about as far as my CSS coercion knowledge goes here. E: being a bit more clear/explicit Munkeymon fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Nov 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:Pretty sure that red thing in your screenshot is the scroll handle. I have no idea why, but changing overflow: auto to overflow-y: scroll fixes things. If anyone understands what the difference is I would love to understand what is going on here... Thanks for your help. https://jsfiddle.net/ad10cfro/ https://jsfiddle.net/2kjzfosp/
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Anyone know of a relatively easy to setup/customize (for a dev, not necessarially for a layperson) membership system that allows for paid subscriptions, different member levels (or membership options, eg. access to X, Y and Z services all have individual costs, user could pick and choose among them), and some administrative controls? I'm pretty open in terms of languages and platforms, though I lean towards WordPress because I'm comfortable with it. I'd also be totally happy with some third party service with a great API. e: For reference, I know such a system could be coded from scratch without too much effort, but I'm also wondering if there's something that's relatively turnkey that I'm not aware of. kedo fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Nov 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
Forgall posted:Marketing bullshit. To expand, the only thing you're buying with an SSL certificate is a file you provide (the Certificate Signing Request) that has been 'signed' by a root certificate owned by the company that issued you the SSL Certificate. That root certificate is trusted by browser vendors to be only used after a degree of validation has been done: that the information on it is correct, the domain it is for is correct, and the person who provided the signing request is in fact the owner of the domain. When you hear of certificate providers being revoked from browser trust stores, they typically failed to validate properly or failed to secure their root certificates. The lowest degree of VERIFICATION is usually domain validation, essentially verifying you control the domain by sending email or hitting the server. Let's encrypt is entirely automated and works this way, and it's free, so do your best not to pay for domain validation ever, it's just not worthwhile anymore with Lets Encrypt as a viable alternative. Other levels of verification may involve mailing documentation, phone calls, etc, and usually goes with Extended Validation Certificates or whatever they brand them for. The only benefit you'll see is that the green lock may also show your business name or whatever, and that's essentially what you're paying for. Absolutely none of these have to do with security or traffic once the certificate is in your hand, although one could say it would be harder for an attacker to get a fake extended validation certificate so that's more 'secure'. Once you have the certificate, provided it was signed up to scratch of an adequate length, it's more up to server configuration than the certificate itself to ensure proper security and performance. Obviously I'm glossing over/simplifying here and there, but this is roughly what a SSL certificate is and is not, but companies have a vested interested in not educating customers when the alternatives are free and essentially identical.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 23:01
|
|
|
Thanks for all the info. I prefer to spend $10 per year because renewing Let's Encrypt every 90 days is more than I can be bothered to do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
rt4 posted:Thanks for all the info. I prefer to spend $10 per year because renewing Let's Encrypt every 90 days is more than I can be bothered to do. Fair, however the intent for let's encrypt is to use one of the authentication methods that can be automated, at which point you literally just run 'letsencrypt renew' on your server every month and it handles the rest. So it's great if you can do that, super ideal for my dev shop at least, one less thing I need to go through the client for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
rt4 posted:Thanks for all the info. I prefer to spend $10 per year because renewing Let's Encrypt every 90 days is more than I can be bothered to do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
IAmKale posted:EFF's Certbot makes it braindead to get Let's Encrypt up and running and renewing automatically. Worst case you have to set up a cronjob to run the renewal command every 89 days. You have to be a literal retard if you can't wrap your head around Certbot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
I'm trying to embed a google form as an 100% height/width iframe for the sake of presenting a nice url. Problem 1 was that the following: code:The second problem, a head scratcher, is that the same code preceded with <!DOCTYPE html> leaves the iframe only 150 px high. ??? Have a look.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 07:12
|
|
|
code:
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 08:32
|
|
|
I manage an old static site that has a "mailto:contact@email.com" link on the home page. It gets hammered with spam pretty regularly. I think I'll remove the "mailto" link completely, but is there a standard clever way these days of still displaying the email address on the page but making it hard for bots to parse? Ideally it would still be copy-pastable by users, so I don't really want to do the goofy "contact [at] email.com" thing, and I'd rather not use an image.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
most places just use a blob of javascript to write it into a clickable, copyable link, since most spambots don't execute JS due to resource cost the alternative if you want something copyable but not linked is to shove a ton of invisible css elements, like fu<u style='display:none'>u</u>f@<u style='text-decoration:none'>e</u>x<b style='display:none'>f</b>ample.com
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 13:00
|
|
|
Clever! Thanks. I used the display:none method just because it was so easy to implement.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
Looking at on-demand grids, what's the current recommended choice? I've used Neat/Bourbon a lot and like it, but I'm hearing good things about Susy and Flint. Anyone have experience using these? Which is most current?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
I used Susy on a couple of projects and ultimately decided it was easier and cleaner to create a few helper mixins and code my own grids. I've also seen Neat used on a lot of projects I've had to interact with and it's pleasant enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
Biowarfare posted:Code Hey, thanks. That cleared up the bordering issues. I ended up going with a redirect anyhow, because the tweaks to enable the responsiveness on the page were having varying success across some different browsers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
Is there a thread about SEO poo poo on SA? I can't find anything in any subforums I would expect it in. Like the entire SEO industry, every single article about the situation I'm in is steeped in bull that's hard to cut through. Even though I'm asking in a thread that's more about technical stuff, my questions are related more to the "business" side of it. I just figured ya'll would know. If there's no SA thread, where should I be looking for guidance? Every result on Google I get is just people boosting their own poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
There was one in BFC years ago, but it was more about monetizing your blog through adsense I think. What I've found useful in this thread is more "how" to do stuff (e.g. what microcode format should I use from structured data/rich snippets) than "why".
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
life is a joke posted:Like the entire SEO industry, every single article about the situation I'm in is steeped in bull that's hard to cut through. SEO is about 75% bullshit, but you still have to pay attention to the bullshit in order to understand the non-bullshit. Go get a subscription to Moz's toolset and learn from there. If you can't afford it, at least do the trial and learn the jargon. My last employer paid to send most the dev and marketing teams to MozCon last year and it was actually really, really useful for all of us even though it was still 50% bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
e: wrong thread sorry
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 06:01
|
|
|
life is a joke posted:Is there a thread about SEO poo poo on SA? I can't find anything in any subforums I would expect it in. Basically just be smart about document structure and don't allow duplicate content on the site. Otherwise, this huge book is the only legit thing I've ever read about SEO.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
well why not posted:Looking at on-demand grids, what's the current recommended choice? I've used Neat/Bourbon a lot and like it, but I'm hearing good things about Susy and Flint. Anyone have experience using these? Which is most current? My next step from Bourbon/Neat was Lost - because it uses calc() It's excellent for waffle grids
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
The thing about SEO is that it's hugely non-technical. A massive portion of the industry is salesmanship and convincing clients the service is working. Another massive portion is navigating the waters of dubious 'advice'. The technical side of things (good markup, rich snippets etc) is kind of a smaller task. The best uptick I've seen in SEO has been following advice from Webmaster Tools / GTMetrix. A 'badly' coded site that's fast as gently caress will be ranked way better than a 'well opimised' site that's slow. The top 3 things are pagerank, speed and mobile support.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 12:03
|
|
|
well why not posted:The thing about SEO is that it's hugely non-technical. A massive portion of the industry is salesmanship and convincing clients the service is working. Another massive portion is navigating the waters of dubious 'advice'. Exactly this, since Google aren't going to tell you the algorithm so it's mostly just trial-and-error or common sense as to what affects your ranking. That, and every now and again Google drops hints like "responsive sites will do better".
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 13:50
|
|
|
Most of SEO is marketing, but there's still a lot of technical stuff that people get wrong surprisingly often: multiple <H1> tags, too many navigation links, <title>Home</title>, no alt tags on images, etc. It can still be worth offering a "technical SEO review" as a service in my (limited) experience. There's also a middle ground between technical and marketing that covers things like explaining to the client about duplicate content and thin pages. I thought about starting an SEO thread a while back because I always have loads of questions but I figured it wouldn't get much traffic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:38 |
|
|
nexus6 posted:That, and every now and again Google drops hints like "responsive sites will do better". I wonder if that's as simple as percentage of elements that could be affected by media width queries or something static-ish* analyzable like that. "Uses flex layout at all: +10 points"
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 14:14
|
|