I love the readthedocs.org service.
However, for some projects I don't care deeply about having different stable and latest versions, and I expect to only have documentation in English for the forseeable future (sorry).
I'm fine with having my site available at /en/latest/my-page.html and /en/stable/my-page.html , but I would also like to see my site available at /my-page.html and have this be the same as the /en/latest/my-page.html content. Is this possible? If so, how?
I think that you want is single versions https://docs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/single_version.html
Related
We are building a small site for a client and while we spoke, the question of html standard popped up and we told him we will do it in HTML5. His question was "what about those who do not support html 5" since he wants to reach the widest possible audience some of whom are in the tech-unsavvy or elderly group?
I've been so deep into html5 for a while that this never crossed my mind, if we use exclusively html5 who exactly is now being left behind and how much of a market share do they represent? I tried googling this, but I can't find any objective material on that topic. I would very much like to avoid falling back on pre-html5 if we are just talking about a few percent of ludites holding out.
Depends entirely on the functionality of HTML 5 you intend to use.
Check out this website: Can I Use
Then based on the functionality you intend to use check what browsers support it, then if you need to use that feature and you can only use say IE 11 and above, but all other browsers support it then you check the browser share for IE 10 and below at: https://netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx
Unfortunately there's no easy answer to the amount of people unable to use your website depending on if you use 'HTML 5' it depends entirely on the feature set, your potential users locations and browser they use.
If you are building a site for a client with an existing website and they use some form of analytics you could use those stats to define the usage levels of browsers and then work from there.
I am learning how to build simple extensions that use content scripts. To do so, I am tweaking existing sample extensions to get a lay of the land -- or at least that is the goal.
Problem is, none of the sample extensions that use content scripts seem to work for me. Two simple ones that should work but are not are: Email this Page, and SandwichBar (Direct link to zipped extension folder http://developer.chrome.com/extensions/examples/api/infobars/sandwichbar.zip ).
I am using Chrome 16.0.912.75 on a Linux box. Any ideas why this might be the case? Conflicting extensions or overriding flags? I would really appreciate any suggestions.
Thank You!
Sandwitch bar do not work because it uses info bar experimental API manifest version 2
Probably because you're using a really old version of Chrome (in internet years at least). They change the APIs from time to time, and probably something they've done in the interim has broken content scripts in Chrome 16 (for example the change from sendRequest to sendMessage). Isn't a more recent version of Chrome available for your platform?
I imagine there must be out there a website that collects information about HTML 5 feature and what browsers version started to support them.
This might be a good way to decide based on your website profile, if you can apply that HTML 5 feature without a fallback for your visitors.
Do you know such a site/resource ?
For example I want to know what browsers support the multiple upload feature for inputs and what browser version was the first.
Update
I'm not pleased with the sites suggested so I'm opening a bounty.
Suggestions so far: Html5Test, Caniuse, modernizr.com, QuirksMode
Update 2
Some people don't understand the question. I need to implement the multiple upload feature. I know from analytics what browser are they using ( I know this is not 100% correct ).
I'm willing to sacrifice some of the visitors by not offering some advance features but I need to understand how big is this procent. I'm NOT trying to DETECT in anyway the browser. It's a similar approach with other sites that dropped IE 6 support.
So please don't talk about bad practice.
Try to look at Html5Test or caniuse.
If it's server side, you can analyze user agent to find out if client's version supports HTML5. Wikipedia is your friend.
If it's client side, there's Modernizr library.
A quick search gave me this interesting result (reproduced in several blogs): http://www.findmebyip.com/litmus/
And you can may also want to take a look at this list of how to detect each feature: http://diveintohtml5.ep.io/everything.html
Here is another website, quite incomplete but verbose and "work in progress" as of March 2011, so it might be worth keeping an eye on: http://html5accessibility.com/
This one is off topic, but since I found it, I add it. CSS compatibility in IE browsers (very extensive): http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc351024(VS.85).aspx
And here you can find info specific to the gecko engine: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/HTML/HTML5
And, of course, MDC has compatibility tables for each feature, but separated in different pages, not as a table, e.g.: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/HTML/Element/input
http://www.modernizr.com/
HTML5Test.com collects the information but they don't give detailed reports for perusal.
A good reference site for some stuff is http://www.browserscope.org/ but that doesn't go into a lot of detail with HTML5 specific support
Another source of related stuff is http://w3c-test.org/html/tests/reporting/report.htm which is creating a set of HTML testing tools that can be run.
You or someone who wanted to create this information could use these tests and then store the UA String of each browser that hit the site with the results of each test.
Then you could just find the earliest version of each browser type that a feature successfully run on.
I think this information is stored in the databases of the sites mentioned but they just don't display it which sort of sucks. Maybe try emailing them and suggesting they add these reports.
Take a look at caniuse.com, it’s exactly what you are searching for.
QuirksMode is also a great resource, and there is an entry for multiple files input.
My vote is for:
http://www.findmebyip.com/litmus
Which i found via this blog:
http://www.deepbluesky.com/blog/-/browser-support-for-css3-and-html5_72/
You should try this website. I hope this is what you were looking for.
I use FrontPage for two different tasks; authoring html help and authoring a couple of websites. The websites don't require a lot of stuff -- they are there to disseminate a bit of information to a couple of small audiences.
FrontPage has been quick and easy for these tasks. WYSIWYG is good for these jobs and I like being able to click on links to quickly bring up other pages in the editor.
I've been exploring all sorts of options. tools that work online such as Kompozer make editing the html help difficult (at least, I haven't found a way around) and other html-level tools are just too much work. Tried nVu, Kompozer, Aptama, Komodo, Bluefish and so far, unless I'm missing something, I'm not sold on any of them.
I'm about to take a look at SeaMonkey but wondering if anybody has any recommendations. Or should I go back and look at those other tools again -- maybe I missed something?
Notepad++
I think the natural upgrade path would be Microsoft Expression Web.
People still use FrontPage?
I switched a couple of years back to DreamWeaver and never looked back.
Something to consider is that you could deploy these sites as wikis (which don't have to be publically editable) and edit them directly on the web in your browser. This would give you the ability to click around and do pretty much wysiwyg edits. It would also make it easier to maintain larger collections of data and to make new pages. You also don't really have to do any HTML at all because wikis mostly come pre-HTMLed (and CSSed and Javascripted), you just need to fill in the content.
I should note that this won't work if your webpages are deployed statically on a restrictive shared hosting account, but even most shared hosting supports installing things like wikis these days, so hopefully this is something you can look into.
I should also note that this probably isn't the best way to do local HTML help files, but if the HTML help is online, this is probably still a good choice.
I'm making this community wiki so others can add links to other wikis if they like or add more info on why you might want to or not want to use a wiki for this purpose.
Some wikis to consider:
MediaWiki - The wiki behind wikipedia
MoinMoin - Implemented in Python and popular in that community.
TiddlyWiki - Implemented in Javascript and runs on a single page. This is probably the most different wiki that's out there. Some love it, some hate it.
NVU and Kompozer both are best suited for you. NVU is my personal choice. Choose your poison. :)
FrontPage has been replaced by SharedPoint Designed in the Office suite.
You could also use Microsoft Expression Web if you can have it.
Drewamweaver or MS's Visual Studio/Web Developer Express will do the trick. They're both overkill (especially MS's tools).
I also think MS has (free) HTMLHelp. It's out there, but I don't know if it'll produce the files you need.
It depends on what kind of pages you are designing. If you are using Adobe Flash, Dreamweaver would be the best option but I would recommend "Microsoft Visual Web Developer Express". I am currently using it and totally love it from the bottom of my heart.
I'd say Dreamweaver, but last time I looked there was still bloated code, not as bad as the MX days mind.
Smashing Magazine has a list of WYSIWYG tools that would be worth a look :
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/05/06/25-wysiwyg-editors-reviewed/
I persuaded my friend to ditch Dreamweaver for NetBeans, took a week or so but I got a pint out of that :)
You might look into Aptana (http://aptana.org) which should provide everything you need. I think it even has a WYSIWYG editor, though I would really recommend learning html instead.
I would use Notepad++ for the simpler things, and Dreamweaver when working with other Adobe products. Notepad++ is simple and has a lot of great features. Dreamweaver is huge and will take some getting used to.
Try dokuwiki. I've implemented a wiki/manual/documentation for my app in a week. It's very simple n easy installing. You just need PHP, no database (mysql), the information is stored on files. Give it a try.
My wiki implemented wiki doku: wiki.vigo.com.br
Microsoft Visual Web Developer Express perhaps? http://www.microsoft.com/express/vwd/
Works well, and it's free!
Something similar to FrontPage is Adobe Contribute. It does cost $199, but if you're looking for something as simple as FrontPage, it may be a good option for you.
A freelancer web designer I work with will setup clients who want to make simple HTML edits to their sites with it and they've all been pretty happy. They're all non-technical people.
Dreamweaver is good, but however using the WYSIWYG may have problems getting consistency when viewing between IE, firefox and safari.
I have recently downloaded an app I have been looking for, for quite some time. It basically spiders a website and shows references to dead links, pages etc:
http://home.snafu.de/tilman/xenulink.html.
I am finding this very useful for quality assurance of the websites we publish.
I was wondering if anyone uses a application that spiders a site like this, but also checks things such as missing ALT tags, accessbility issues and valid xHtml code.
Using the W3C validator is a good idea as well.
link text
If you want accessibility checking, the one that I know of is HiSoftware's Cynthia Says. There are some drawbacks - it only checks 1 page at a time (at least, I don't know of a way to check an entire site) and you can only check 1 page on a given site each minute.
However, HiSoftware does make commercially available tools for accessibility checking, with regards to 508 and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. I've never used any of these tools, though.
Selenium IDE is an automation QA plugin for Firefox. It is easy to configure using a single HTML table to write rules.
For many things you are looking for I would check out https://www.screamingfrog.co.uk/seo-spider/ tool. There is a free version available as well if your website is not too deep.
For accessibility testing check out https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/axe-devtools-web-accessib/lhdoppojpmngadmnindnejefpokejbdd?hl=en-US Chrome Add-on.