I was making a new path for pages on my site and was trying to figure out how to path to my stylesheet and images cleanly. Here's an element that shows my problem:
<link rel="stylesheet" href="/src/styles.css">
My local copy of my site is hosted here at "E:/Documents/WEBSITE", the local page I'm trying to link the stylesheet from is "file:///E:/Documents/WEBSITE/things/weapons.html", and the stylesheet is at "E:/Documents/WEBSITE/src/styles.css". I have the local site open on Firefox and I am using VSC to code. When I follow the href path in VSC, it brings me to the correct stylesheet. When I upload a version of the site that has the same path, it works correctly.
I have the local site open on Firefox and I am using VSC to code. When I follow the href path in VSC, it brings me to the correct stylesheet.
I've looked over the code and made sure it would(and does) work otherwise. Like I said, it works when on the live site.
I've placed dummy "src" folders with "styles.css" in them on my base E drive, my Documents folder, and even in the "things" folder itself. If the href were pulling from any one of these, there would be an obvious change to the local site, but none of them are pulled from with that path.
When I upload a version of the site that has the same path, it works correctly. The same happens with some elements that I tried this with the src on. It simply will not work locally. The only other thing I can possibly think of is that it has a problem with the "file://" at the beginning, but I can't imagine how I would troubleshoot or avoid that. I get no errors logged.
I really can't include a reproducible example of code, but what I've done that works locally and on a live site:
<link rel="stylesheet" href="../src/styles.css">
and to reiterate, this doesn't work locally, but it works on a live site:
<link rel="stylesheet" href="/src/styles.css">
And just to clarify at the end here, the path is working when the site is live, but not locally. Not the other way around.
href="/src/styles.css" is an absolute path, not a relative one.
From file:///E:/Documents/WEBSITE/things/weapons.html it maps to something like file:///E:/src/styles.css (I think Windows file paths preserve the drive, but I'm not certain).
The browser has no way of knowing that you want file:///E:/Documents/WEBSITE/ to be the root directory of the site. The root is determined by stripping all the path information off the URL, not just parts of the path.
Absolute paths are, generally, not suitable for links used on a local file system.
Use an HTTP server. There are many free ones you can use for testing. VS Code has an extension called Live Server that makes it easy to run one.
Related
The element is selected properly because other properties apply. There are no console errors.
I have tried:
img/hero.jpg - works when I click on link in VS Code
/img/hero.jpg - works when I click
../../hero.jpg - work when I click
../img/hero.jpg - doesn't work
the full path - works when I click
The problem is seen here. You can see that images called by the src attribute work.
Here is the file structure.
I honestly don't understand your setup / question, but I think if you understand how relative URLs work a little better you can figure it out yourself.
On your server you have your files in somewhere like,
/var/www/html/index.html
/var/www/html/css/styles.css
/var/www/html/img/background.png
On your computer you have your files somewhere like,
C:\Users\Nani\Desktop\Website\index.html
C:\Users\Nani\Desktop\Website\css\styles.css
C:\Users\Nani\Desktop\Website\img\background.png
And in your styles.css you have something like this,
body {
background-image: url('/img/background.png');
}
Starting the URL with / tells the browser to interpret it as the root directory. On a Windows PC it will be C:\ and on a Linux PC it'll be /.
However, when you access the page once it is online from a url like https://example.com, the root directory becomes https://example.com/.
Therefore, using /img/background.png will make it look for the image at https://example.com/img/background.png once it is online, but on your local machine it'll be looking for the image at C:\img\background.png
Starting the url without the slash like this, img/background.png looks for the image relative to the folder that the css file is in. So in that case online it'll look for the background here at https://example.com/css/img/background.png and on your local machine it'll look in C:\Users\Nani\Desktop\Website\css\img\background.png
In my example, the best solution would be to use ../img/background.png, that'll look up one directory relative to the css folder, and then in the img folder. That'll work consistently on both your own computer and once it is uploaded.
That should be enough to figure out what you need to do assuming that the problem is the way the url path is declared. Otherwise, the problem might be with something else. For example, it seems like you're using SCSS. Perhaps the SCSS isn't compiled on your local machine (or hasn't been in a while), but it is compiled on the live server?
It works on live server because its settings make location of index.html a root of your document (/). When you open index.html directly your root is different and images aren't loaded from correct location if you start the path with /.
Best Practice
It is best practice to use relative file paths (if possible).
When using relative file paths, your web pages will not be bound to your current base URL. All links will work on your own computer (localhost) as well as on your current public domain and your future public domains.
I had the same problem and it turns out that I wrote the path wrongly. You have to write the url based on where the css file is, not where the index file is. Because the one that reads the url is the css file. So it should look like this:
body {background-image: url('../img/background.png');}
Because your CSS and your IMG are in different folders.
All,
I did a bit of research but haven't found an exact thread or resolution to this issue.
I am using express in this webapp, Chrome Version 60.0.3112.113, and Win 10 Version 1703.
I am currently developing a site where I want to use a hamburger svg for mobile navigation. This is how the html sits for the "topbar"
<div id="topbar">
<img src="../images/hamburger.svg" alt="ham">
</div>
And here is the file structure:
https://puu.sh/xxDih/c842297b54.png
According to the structure, I should only need to do ../images/hamburger.svg, but when I do that, it comes up with a 404 error in the waterfall. I have run into this issue multiple times doing any sort of HTML sourcing into parent directories, but in JS files it works fine.
I'm not exactly sure what the issue is.
For the express server，every uri are processed by the express contains resource url and request url.
Request url(api) is refered to your express api config
resource(image, js, css, html...) is relative to your static server's root directory which was defined by using express.static(root_path).
That's what I want to say.
I noticed that images folder, node_modules folder, and pages folder are all in the same directory, and css is under the pages folder.
"../images/hamburger.svg" is the correct relative path from the pages folder, but being (big red flag) the node_modules is at "../node_modules/" I'm thinking that the server is serving from /pages/ folder, the servers root directory. meaning anything above the /pages/ folder will not be shared.
Clearly you do not want to share out ../../../windows/system32/ or the user documents etc. To prevent sharing those the highest directory you can access from the html page through a browser is the server folder being used. I'm thinking /pages/home.html is localhost/home.html and localhost/css/ is your css directory.
Programs running on the server can access files above the served directory, but the browser can not. "/node_modules/" should be outside of the servers root directory.
I realized this is an issue with express itself.
If (in this case) you have your index.html as express.static('./pages'), then it can't see anything above pages and considers pages as the working directory.
Me, coming from React (which stupidly was the first thing I learned even before basic JS), wants to put all the pages in one folder, which I think would make sense.
The workaround I did, which may not be optimal, was by putting index.html as a sibling to pages, css, and images in the src folder. Then in index.html, it has a meta tag as follows: <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0; url=./pages/home.html" /> to redirect to the home.html page.
Again, this may not be optimal, but for a kinda OCD guy like myself this makes sense.
Update:
What we ended up doing is to have index.html be a static page, and then load the individual pages in an iframe. This website is mainly for information and has no database (yet), so there won't be much to process. Here's the new file structure that works.
http://puu.sh/xy5Dw/4dbc72ec06.png
src is now our working directory (express.static('./src')) and everything is detailed within there.
Once we do include a database, it will at most be 10 values in the server and will be using very basic requests, nothing crasy.
Just wondering how/why this works, when I'm making a simple html file and linking in some css, then dragging my html file into the browser, no static web server is needed for me to view the file.
Why is that so..
I'm looking at my browser's network tab, and no request is made for the css file, and my browser still displays it perfectly..
Is there a way to do without a static file server on the web for html, css, js files, like when dragging and dropping a file into a browser?
Just going back and requestionning basics here..
Thanks in advance!
Because the link to your CSS file is relative, and your CSS file is accessible locally. Browsers can be used to access local files, not just files on the Internet.
When working with links, you may see just the name of the file referenced, as such:
Link
This is known as a relative link. file.html is relative to wherever the document is that is linking to it. In this case, the two files would be in the same folder.
There's a second type of link, known as an absolute URL, where the full path is specified.
Consider a typical absolute website link:
Link
With a local file, this would essentially be:
Link
The file protocol can be used to access local files.
Considering both the homepage (presumably index.html) and file.html would live in the same folder on both a web server and your local machine, Link would work for either scenario. In fact, with a relative link, the location of the second file is automatically determined based on the location of the first file. In my example, index.html would live at file://[YOUR WEBSITE]/index.html, so your browser is smart enough to known to look in file://[YOUR WEBSITE]/ when searching for any relative URLs.
Note that the same scenario applies to any other file! <link> and <script> tags will look for files in the exact same way -- that includes your stylesheet :)
Hope this helps!
Sounds like you are new to HTML and web development.
It all has to do with relative versus absolute file paths.
Check out these articles and have fun coding! Always remember that Google is your friend, improve your search-foo and you will not have to ask questions like this.
God speed.
http://www.geeksengine.com/article/absolute-relative-path.html
http://www.coffeecup.com/help/articles/absolute-vs-relative-pathslinks/
How to properly reference local resources in HTML?
I have a huge problem: Everytime I want to include a file in any kind of web project it does not work because for some reason all paths I put into the (for example) html file as a link or script tag don't load because it seams like the relative paths are not working. If I open the html as a file in chrome, it's actually looking for the file in the root directory of the drive and not in the folder of the html. The same error appears if I try to use any kind of local webserver (real hosted server works). I also downloaded any kind of demo projects and installed a few yeoman generators and the all got the same problem: Chrome says that it cannot find the file or it's just an empty file.
That's the reason why I think the problem has to do with my own pc. Any ideas what could cause this issue?
If your URLs for includes start with /, they will go to the absolute path. When testing locally from your filesystem, this is the root drive (such as C:\). If you want relative path, drop the /.
Also, check for the following tag in your HTML: <base href...> See http://w3schools.com/tags/tag_base.asp. Make sure it's not set to / if you're testing locally.
This <base> tag helps shorten potentially lengthy relative paths. For example:
<script src="resources/production/script.js"></script>
If you add <base href="resources/production/"> to the <head> element, you can shorten your script tag to src="script.js"
Beware ALL relative paths will have their root at resources/production/ if you define it in your <base> tag
When opening a file from your hard drive into your browser, where is the document root? To illustrate, given the following HTML code, if the page is opened from the local machine (file:///) then where should the css file be for the browser to find it?
<link href="/temp/test.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />
You can, but probably don't want to, set the document root on a per-file basis in the head of your file:
<base href="my-root">
It depends on what browser you use, but Internet Explorer, for example, would take you to the root directory of your harddrive (eg. C:/), while browsers such as Firefox does nothing.
On a Mac, the document root is what you see in the window that appears after you double click on the main hard drive icon on your desktop. The temp folder needs to be in there for a browser to find the CSS file as you have it written in your code.
Actually, you could also write the code like this:
<link href="file:///temp/test.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />
Eric, the document root is the folder in which your file is, wherever it may be.
As far as local, static html goes, unless you specify it, most browsers will take the location of the html file you are viewing as the root. So any css put in there can just be referenced by it's name only.
The lazy way to get the correct reference for your css file is to open it in your browser. Then just grab the url that you see there - something like: file:///blah/test.css and copy that into your stylesheet link on your html: <link href="file:///blah/test.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css">
Either that or you can just take the url for the html file and amend it to refer to the stylesheet.
Then your local page should load fine with the local stylesheet.
If you're interested in setting the document root, you might look at getting a web server installed on your machine, or, if you already have one (like Apache or IIS), storing your project-in-development in the web root of that server (htdocs in Apache, not entirely sure in IIS). If you'd rather leave your files where they are, you can set up virtual hosts and even map them to addresses that you can type into your browser (for example, I have a local.mrwarshaw.com address that resolves to the web root of my personal site's development folder).
If you're on Windows and don't want to mess around with setting up a server on your own, you could get a package like XAMPP or WAMPP, though bear in mind that those carry the extra weight of PHP and MySQL with them. Still, if you've got the space, they're a pretty easy drop-in development environment for your machine.