This might be a yes/no question, because it's still not clear to me what level of Jekyll customization is allowed in Github pages. I've been tinkering a lot with code blocks and syntax highlighting and it seems since sometime in the last 9 months, the options for syntax highlighting in Github pages has been limited to rouge, which I think works pretty well. The documentation on this is brief and I've been getting more details scattered around the web. I was going to go to the trouble of making a custom lexar, following the wiki instructions, but if there's nowhere to slot this into my Github page, maybe it isn't worth the trouble. (Actually making the lexar probably wouldn't take very long... I'd just be simplifying another one).
My question is this: would my hypothetical custom lexar have to be implemented through a Jekyll plugin and thus not allowed on Github pages? Or is there another way? Thanks.
Related
I'm trying to implement my own little reader view app (an app that would do the same thing as reader-mode on safari), and there are a few things I find asking myself:
Is there a technical term for this feature (reader-view doesn't really cut it)?
Is there a standard that websites are supposed to follow in order to indicate the content they would like to have in their reader views
Is there an open-source set of HTML parsing rules to pull the "readable" content from a website?
Is the effort to implement such a thing simply too big for a single person in a few weeks and if so should I opt for services such as Instaparser?
I believe the original to be implemented by arc90, and they called it readability. You can check out their page here.
It's been ported to many different languages over time, so you could take a look at the different implementations to learn more about it, how it's done etc.
Python readability
JReadability
JavaScript
Ruby
This is just a small sample here, there's many more examples if you would like to find more.
Edit: Oops, after some more Googling I found this question with an answer that explains it very well.
I am developing a blog using Jekyll. I've been reading over the documentation, however I realized that I haven't seen anything about followers. Does Jekyll offer an option for people to follow a blog, as well as a means to keep track of followers?
Thanks for your help!
You would have to extend the functionality of Jekyll with a custom plugin to build followers with the site. You can use social media to promote and build followers. Jekyll is just a static site/blog generator.
I would look at adding a plugin like addthis for social, etc. This will allow your users to promote content on the various social platforms.
"Does Jekyll offer an option for people to follow a blog, as well as a means to keep track of followers?"
The answer to that question is NO.
You can build your own plugin, but having a dynamic (user influenced) number on your website does not fit the concept of a static site (and is therefore not part of Jekyll).
A RSS feed that uses server metrics (log files) to measure the amount of readers, however, fits the Jekyll concept perfectly. A mailing list, like Brandon suggests, is also a very good solution. Adding spyware through AddThis works too, but that would be my very last resort. However, these are not solutions 'Jekyll offers'. Therefore, the answer remains 'no'.
I am looking for a blogging platform that has built in tools for programming-related content. For example, I've seen blogs that have line-numbers, color-coded line separation, code-formatting and tool tips for copying and pasting code-samples. Some of these are better than others. (I'm sure I'm not the only one here who gets annoyed by blog entries with posted source that you can't copy without also copying all the line numbers). So, my question is what blogging-platform does the community recommend for a developer-oriented blog?
er...none that i know of. at the moment, you have to get the bits and pieces together. for my own blog (Blogger, so i'm limited in addons), i use Highlight code converter to generate the display HTML/inline CSS, clean it up a bit (the default settings assume you're creating an entire web page from the code) by removing unnecessary markup, then using it in my blog posts.
Wordpress has the code highligthing feature using some addins, if you are going to host it yourself it will be a very good option to use Wordpress.
BlogDown is a static blogging platform, so it can be hosted on GitHub. You can write posts with markdown files, which has great support for code snippets. You can write your own themes and modules for it also. Unlike Jekkyl, BlogDown does not have a compilations step. You just swap out the markdown files, and you're good to go. It's also worth noting that BlogDown supports custom renderers.
I'm trying to create a theme for a CMS, but it's proving nearly impossible, as I have no understanding of PHP or ASP.NET. I can put a site together via CSS and HTML, but I want clients to be able to add and edit content themselves. I'm about ready to give up on designing one altogether and just use an existing theme.
I've had a go at trying to understand the inner workings of Wordpress, SilverStripe, Umbraco and Pixie, but the tutorials have left me confounded. Are there other CMSes I should be looking into for a more simplified theming process?
I'd really love to be able to just drop a chunk of code into the content area of a given HTML page, and make that region editable from a WYSIWYG front end that the client can log into. Is there such a thing?
Anything but DotNetNuke.
I'd recommend giving Wordpress another try.
I'm no web developer, just a an average Java/C# programmer who needed a web site and has some basic knowledge of HTML and CSS. What I did was find a theme that was similar to what I wanted, then started tweaking it incrementally. My theme is pretty basic, but before long I got a pretty good grasp of "The Loop" and printing out category and page links and such.
How about Movable Type?
You can (and should) edit the templates via the web interface, they are divided into separate modules, so you can concentrate on one area of the site, styling is of course handled via CSS.
It took me a few hours without any prior experience with this CMS to completely port a Wordpress theme to MT - I found the documentation very helpful and didn't even have to look elsewhere.
An awesome thing about MT - it generates static pages based on the templates you defined. Meaning, very low load on the server, you don't need to query the database on every request, etc. You could probably do the same/similar by activating the cache plugin (or is it built in now?) in Wordpress, but here it's the default modus operandi so it's more stable and integrated with the CMS.
Drupal with the zen theme (or a "lighter" version of it: Starkish theme) seems like a popular choice (and well deserved, too). It gives you a good starting point, it has great documentation and many modules available.
PS: I've added this as an additional answer so that it can be voted upon separately from my other suggestion - I just could not stop myself from bringing up the Drupal + zen combo :)
I worked with Joomla, it is really easy to have a theme for it without knowing any programming language. When you install it using a simple installer, there will be a folder named templates. There are three simple themes each in its own folder. Just copy one of them,change XML data for that theme ( just to name it and have some details, no programming ) and change the contents of CSS and HTMLs. every where you see something unrelated to HTML like , copy them!! Names are descriptive. so you can guess what do they do. give it a try!
I'd really love to be able to just drop a chunk of code into the content area of a given HTML page, and make that region editable from a WYSIWYG front end that the client can log into. Is there such a thing?
The only system I've come across with this kind of functionality is Perch.
Just create your website using HTML/CSS as usual and chuck in a few small php tags where you want editable content. These areas are then added to an admin area for your clients to edit.
The only drawback is it costs £35 per site - I don't know if there's a free/open-source CMS with this functionality...
It's difficult to say which CMS will be the best one for you (maybe your question should be made into a community wiki question).
I have a little experience with mojoPortal, and found it to be easily customizable. There's a lot of documentation about how to skin your CMS and there a lots of complete skins that you can use as a starting point.
There is also a demo site, where you can see how the CMS works for an end-user.
Take a look at Joomla. That was the first CMS that I really used, and I still think its templating engine is better than most of the others out there.
Its template system essentially lets you build a standard web page, and then use some simple tags to define where the content and modules would go. You can override the output of most external components and modules without too much trouble, and the vast library of third-party extensions should help you add a ton of functionality to your site without much coding on your part. Joomla also has a fairly easy-to-use administrative backend, so your clients should like it too.
This page for themeing Wordpress helped me a lot:
Theme Development
UPDATE
Xichael,
If you know HTML and CSS pretty well, but you just don't want to spend time learning the Wordpress framework, then I think this is a good option for you (again, I can relate to your situation). Use Wordpress with the new Toolbox starter theme. It's super minimal.
Toolbox: An HTML5 WordPress Starter Theme
Here's an example of what it looks like. Just "View page source" and go to town on the CSS!
I've thought about writing my own very simple CMS just for handling pages, i.e. you have some sort of template, and then a <div> in the middle to drop in text from a WYSIWYG editor. You could even use XML as the data store to eliminate having to set up a database to store the page content.
It would sort of be re-inventing the wheel though, because there is so much polished CMS software out there already, but it wouldn't be that hard because it wouldn't have 99% of the features most systems have. However, what happens when your client wants to add something in the future that's already standard in an existing CMS or plugin?
If you are looking for a simple CMS tool, CMSimple is as basic as it gets. A small PHP based CMS system that does not even require a database or XML.
"CMSimple is the ideal tool for a single user to maintain a website."
Original version here: CMSimple.ORG
Original plus 2 enhanced versions here: Download CMSimple
117KB content manangement system
no database required; the entire site is stored in a single HTML file
built in WYSIWYG
no modules or widgets, no blog, no comments, etc., just basic pages
uses PHP (but no database)
Get themes here: dotcomwebdesign.com
[This question is somewhat related to this question, but the answers are not...]
I have always used relative paths in HTML and scripting languages (PHP/ASP/JSP) to refer to EVERYTHING. I think the justification had to do with 'what if the website gets hosted in some weird subdirectory.' But my coworker has started throwing absolute paths into a PHP site we're working on. At first I was appalled, but then I thought, "why not? We'll never be hosted in a subdirectory." Nowadays, getting hosted in the root is not an uncommon necessity. Is it still necessary to "code" (markup, really) with relative paths? I think it's probably an antiquated practice by now.
Definitely. You never know where your code is going to end up, or for what purpose.
Suppose you build a new version of a site, but to help your users transition, you move the old version to a "/classic" subdirectory. The same often happens the other way around where sites will host a beta version of the new redesign in a "/new" directory.
Building it properly the first time shouldn't be a hassle, and you'll thank yourself for it one day.
Well, it's probably not the end of the world but it's building in a dependency that you don't need.
If for example you ever want to put a number of versions in subdirectories in a test harness, or subdirectories help to work around some other issue (such as combining this with some other app that insists on being in the root), you may find it harder.
Sure, you can probably always work around it in some other way - but the problem is you now have to.
Edit: Killed my opening paragraph as it was based on a miss-interpretation of the referenced article.
I always use an absolute path for the following reasons:
Includes:
1. When you use a templating system, you never know the directory structure that a document is going to have when it's calling the include.
2. If documents are going to be moved around, you can be pretty sure it's going to be the documents themselves rather than the includes. If it is the includes, then they're being moved my someone who knows what going on. Added to this, if it is someone not familiar with absolute/relative path, they'll understand absolute a lot better than relative.
css: (as well as the items above)
1. When editing with Web Developer, relative backgrounds disappear when your style sheet isn't in the same directory as the doc.
2. By spec, when you put something on the 'Net, it should be there for the duration. When I'm building something new, I build it in a new folder, or with a new file name and leave all the old docs alone.
If you're using dynamically-generated pages, dynamically generate your URLs. For example, with JSTL use <c:url>. Not only does this allow you to move your pages in the future, it also ensures that your URLs will be properly escaped (tell the truth: how often do you build query strings with &? if you want the W3C validator to accept them, you need to).
For my personal website, which uses PHP to build pages, I've created several methods: insertPageRef(), insertCodeRef(), and so on, that create valid HREFs. As a result, I don't hesitate to re-arrange my site structure as it evolves.
The case of being moved to a subdirectory is fairly unusual, I'd say. Far more usual is being hosted on different servers: you create your site for testing on "dev.yourcompany.com" then go live by moving it to "www.yourcompany.com". In that case, you need to use relative links for obvious reasons.