A recurring problem with modern web design can be summed up as "too much sh** all over the place". There're two problems with this: one, it takes up memory and takes longer to load, and two, it visually clutters the webpage.
If I just wanted to solve the second problem, I wouldn't need help. JavaScript can delete DOM nodes and CSS can hide them, so there're already a few visible ways to simply hide parts of a webpage. What I want to do is solve the first problem - make a webpage load faster by not loading certain elements.
I'm pretty sure it's impossible to selectively download certain parts of an HTML file. But once the source is downloaded, the browser doesn't have to actually parse and display all of it, does it?
Of course, if this is done after it's already been parsed and displayed, it would be pointless. So I need a way to tell Chrome what to do before it begins parsing the HTML. Is this possible, and do you think it would significantly reduce load time/memory usage?
Yeah, unfortunately Ive never seen a way of changing the html before Chrome renders it.
But as far as blocking things that that page gets to display then Id recommend just using AdBlock https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/gighmmpiobklfepjocnamgkkbiglidom
AdBlock can be used to stop resources (js,images,css,xmlhttprequest) from ever being downloaded (it blocks them in the background using the webRequest api) and can also hide elements using css...its rather effective (just remember to select advanced options in its option page and then when you click the AdBlock button you get "Show the resource list"). Also installing Flashblock can help...or disable plugins in Chromes settings, doing this will make them not load but will still show on the page and then you can make them load.
Totally possible! Meet the newest Chrome API: webRequest, finalized in the current version of Chrome - 17.
Docs for webRequest: http://code.google.com/chrome/extensions/webRequest.html#event-onBeforeRequest
I'm trying to think of a solid way to do this... one suggestion I have is using the 'sub_frame' filter, and watching if it's a like/tweet/social button url
You could also block known analytics stuff... and the list goes on! Have fun! Do you have an email list I can sub to for when you launch? If not, get one and drop me a comment!
(From the comments, here is how a innerHTML hack could work)
//This modLoop constantly peers into and modifies the innerHTML in attempt to modify the html before it's fully processed.
var modLoop = function modLoop(){
var html = document.documentElement.innerHTML
//modify the page html before it's processed!
//like: html = html.replace('//google'sCDN.com/jquery/1.7.1/', chrome.extension.getURL('localjQuery.1.7.1.js'));
//I just pulled that ^ out of nowhere, you'll want to put careful thought into it.
//Then, mod the innerHTML:
document.documentElement.innerHTML = html;
setTimeout(modLoop, 1);
};
var starter = function starter(){
if (document.documentElement.innerHTML && document.documentElement.innerHTML.lengh > 0) {
modLoop();
} else {
setTimeout(starter, 1);
}
};
starter();
Related
I want to add a background music to my website, but i want that music to play continuously across all pages.
For e.g: i have music which is approx 10min, i am on Home page for 2 minutes music starts from 1 second, when i goto other page the music should start from 2 minutes 1 second.
i've searched across Google & StackOverflow but unfortunately didn't found any answer as per my requirement. :(
i just wanted to know that is it possible to do??? If yes then what kind of mechanism is used for that???
As far as I know, this is not quite easy to accomplish.
There are two practices you may follow, with the first being the most common (IMHO).
Sites that have a music background that doesn't start all over when you navigate, mostly use Ajax or similar methods to navigate, instead of allowing the page to normally refresh. This is mostly common with flash websites, but it is possible to do with Ajax refreshing just the inner content of your site.
The second way would involve somehow passing on a variable that remembers where the user was, but you cannot avoid the loading gaps, and the whole result would be very uncommon and not really pleasant.
There's a few ways you can do this off the top of my head. The easiest would probably be some JavaScript that would load the content of the next page into the current page:
<div id="content">[Your changing page content goes in here]</div>
A link:
Some Page
Some JS:
function loadNext(page){
//using jquery
// assigning to a var like this lets you do things like abort the call
var jqxhr = $.ajax({type:"get",url:page,dataType:"text"});
jqxhr.success(function(result){ $("#content").html(result); });
}
Another, probably simpler way is to load your page content into an iframe and then just have them navigate within that, that'd be a lot safer too as it won't break if people have JS disabled.
<iframe src="homepage.html"></iframe> //You'll need to size this to whatever the content needs obviously, like 'style="width:100%;height:100%"'
Both of these solutions require that your content be able to be separately loaded from the wrapper of the page, so that things like headers and footers don't duplicate infinitely as you navigate around.
So I have been looking into this for a few weeks and have come up with nothing!
I work on the website for my families music store, and have been asked to add a "Links" page to the website. My goal would be to have the categories of our vendors (i.e. Violin, Guitar, Piano, etc.) on the left of the page and when the category is selected the links come up on the right. That part I have. The tricky part here is: When a link to a vendor (i.e. Fender, G&L, Yahmaha) is clicked instead of taking them directly to the site, I want it to take them all to the same page, but embeded on that page is the site.
I have done a lot of research on this and have come up with nothing. I could just go through and make a new page for each of the vendors, with the embedding on each individual page, but that is extremely time consuming with the amount of vendors.
Is something like this at all possible? I've been playing with embedding itself and have that down. It just comes down to, which link did they click, and loading that specific page.
If there is any more information you may need to help or point me in the right direction please let me know! Same with any code that may be helpful!
I've come up dead on all my research on this.
EDIT: I guess my ultimate goal is that it will look something like this: http://answers.yahoo.com/ so that the vendors website is open on bottom, but our stores banner and links are still at the top. Out website can be found here: http://www.brassbellmusic.com/default.aspx
I've created a JSFiddle to demo this functionality using jQuery.
We iterate through the list of brand links in the ul:
$('#brandListing a')
Capturing a click event on each:
.click(function(ev){
jQuery passes an event object to the anonymous function (ev). When the link is clicked, we first must prevent the default action, which is to follow the link. Then we update the src attribute of the iframe (the "embedded page") with the value of the href that was clicked:
ev.preventDefault();
$('#embeddedBrandWebsite').attr('src', ev.target.href);
You'll need to add the jQuery library to your page to use my code sample, but it's possible to replicate the functionality without it.
EDIT
The sample above is for a single page implementation, where links and the embed are on the same page. To achieve the requested "transfer of information," I recommend passing the target href as a GET parameter (brassbellmusic.com/brandEmbed.aspx?path=http%3A//www.gibson.com/). On the single "embed" page, you can then extract this either on the server side to set the iframe's src, or using javascript. With javascript, you might use:
function getURLParameter(name) {
return decodeURI(
(RegExp(name + '=' + '(.+?)(&|$)').exec(location.search)||[,null])[1]
);
}
Source
And then after your document is ready, set the iframe src using getURLParameter('path').
I've been asked to fix a few bugs on a website, and one of them is throwing me for a loop. Due to the style layout of this particular site, when a user selects and copies text from a specified area, they copy rich text data which if pasted into a rich text editor, results in a large black text on black-background blob.
Ideally, I would like to strip all style data, or somehow enable plain text copying on a particular set of data.
Is this possible? Or would I have to resort to something like a a Flash applet like what GitHub uses for Git URLs?
If you're happy with using JavaScript to solve the problem you can capture the "oncopy" events (credit to #FirstZero) on the elements you wish to restyle, and then restyle the element using JavaScript and style it back again after a timeout.
If you are okay using jQuery you can use JavaScript similar to the following:
$('p').bind(
'copy',
function(e) {
var copyElem= $(e.target);
var defaultColor = copyElem.css('color');
copyElem.css('color', 'pink'); // Change the color to pink for copy
window.setTimeout(
function() {copyElem.css('color', defaultColor);}, // Change it back
1
);
}
);
(Try it out in jsFiddle)
Note that this would be neater if there existed an onaftercopy event, but unfortunately there doesn't seem to.
I've only tested the above solution in Chrome, but it should work in Firefox (since 3.0), latest versions of Chrome and Safari, and in Internet Explorer. It will probably not work in Opera.
Many many years ago, I made a custom form that replicated the look of a menu on a video game. At the time, Firefox didn't allow many form UI widgets (Firefox 2.something?) to be styled with CSS. Apparently in the last few years that has changed.
What I wound up doing to resolve this problem was creating a very large input text-box with the content passed in via the value="" attribute. (<input type="text", not <textarea)
Despite the ability to style input boxes and their content, this information is not retained when copying the text itself. So I completely side-stepped the issue, and the fixes are live!
It was quite a bit simpler too, absolutely no-JS required.
We are currently using a meta refresh to initiate a download on a page, I read on Wikipedia that using this is not UX (user experience) friendly. So what is the way to have a download start after a few seconds when landing on a download page.
User interface-friendly way would:
Not spring an unannounced surprise to the user. So postpone the download by X seconds and clearly announce that.
This is done by setting up JavaScript logic to display a changing countdown to download. See below for details on implementation.
Allow user to control this by allowing immediate download
This is done by having the download timer announcement provide a widget (button or a link) to download immediately.
Keep the current page, by opening the download in a new window/tab.
The "kick off the download" logic should preferably be - instead of the obvious setting of window.location.href - something which opens a new window for the download. This way you allow the user to keep the main download landing page intact.
If possible, present a nice download widget
Instead of just pushing the URL of the download target, consider using custom download wisget like jQuery's jDownload plugin
To implement the changing countdown, do something like this:
Set up a variable for how long till download starts:
var DownloadIn = 10;
Set up a timer in JavaScript using setTimeout()`:
setTimeout("shouldWeDownload()", DownloadIn * 1000);
Subroutine shouldWeDownload() called from a timer will:
check if time period (stored in DownloadIn variable) is greater than zero.
If the time is NOT up (greater than zero), it will:
a. Check if a special "AlreadyDownloading" variable is set to true - this variable will be explained later. If true, simply exit.
b. print to a special DIV on the page - something very obvious and visible to the user - a message "XXX seconds left till the start of download. Click on this link to start the download".
c. Decrement DownloadIn variable
d. Set the timer again using the same setTimeout
If the time's up, kick off the download.
In addition, the "this link" link in the message would also immediately kick off the download. To make things clean, the "immediate dowload" onClick JS handler should set a special "AlreadyDownloading" variable which is checked in the logic above should be set to true, so we don't start a second download due to minor race conditions.
I don’t know of any research on what users expect, but I’d suggest mentioning that it’s a download in your initial download link, e.g.
Download my awesome track
(Maybe style that link like a big button, maybe even with an arrow pointing downwards in it: e.g. something like this.)
And then set your server to return that file with the Content-disposition header set to 'attachment' and the name of the file, so that the browser immediately lets the user know they’re downloading something:
Content-disposition: attachment; filename=kiss_from_a_rose__dubstep_remix.mp3
That way you don’t open a new page just to make the file download. The file downloads, the user’s still on the page where they were when it’s downloaded, everyone’s happy.
Fewer steps = fewer things for users to be confused by.
Using the browser’s UI = more chance that the user will have seen it before, and thus know what’s going on
unix user freindly? Depends entirely on the browser, and last time I checked, most/all linux browsers and safari worked fine with meta refresh.
Which is why most websites offer meta refresh with a download link.
Should links to external sites set target=_blank? E.g. I am on www.acme.net and have a link to www.otherplace.net, should that link be:
<a href='http://www.otherplace.net' target='_blank'>otherplace's website</a>
or:
<a href='http://www.otherplace.net'>otherplace's website</a>
I was under the impression that using _blank to sites outside your domain was best practice, but now I am being told otherwise.
Some web idealists will state that you should allow the user to make their own choices when it comes to navigation - I have a lot of sympathy with this view. As web developers, we shouldn't be forcing such decisions on our visitors.
However, I also know that businesses often want to 'retain control' and so insist on spawning a new tab/window for external sites. An I understand this too - It's a very practical approach, particularly when you consider that how many users don't know how to control their own UA.
I often tend to steer a middle course between the two, by adding an image (I'm sure you will have seen many in your time) that indicates which links are external, and a note to indicate that external links will open in a new tab/window.
Not quite as 'pure' as the first option, but at least it is clear to the user how the site will behave.
found this on the w3c site
Checkpoints in this section:
•10.1 Until user agents allow users to
turn off spawned windows, do not cause
pop-ups or other windows to appear and
do not change the current window
without informing the user. [Priority
2] Content developers should avoid
specifying a new window as the target
of a frame with target="_blank".
More info here
the question you need to ask your client is "To what priority level are you aiming to achieve?"
I think it totally depends on your use case.
If you are opening a site in another domain and need to keep your site open, and I think in most cases you do, then use target='_blank'.
As a user, I find it annoying when I click on a link to another domain and it moves me from the original domain. Of course, using ctrl+click in most browsers is a way to defend against this - but why make the user do more work?
It might also be worth to mention that using target attribute is not xhtml valid. I do usually open links in external window or tab because I see that most regular users (not the advanced ones) want it that way so that they can always get back to the site they were on - usually they would go deep into the other site and then it become unfriendly for them having to click back multiple times.
So in terms of usability I think that there's more users that don't use special techniques to manually open links in new window/tab.
With regards to the xhtml validation, you might want to decorate your links with rel="external" or some similar word then use this JS function to handle new window open. I did it like this 99% of time in the last few years.
function externalLinks() {
if (!document.getElementsByTagName) return;
var anchors = document.getElementsByTagName("a");
for (var i = 0; i < anchors.length; i++) {
var anchor = anchors[i];
if (anchor.getAttribute("href") &&
anchor.getAttribute("rel") == "external")
anchor.target = "_blank";
}
}
/**
DOCUMENT LOAD
**/
$(document).ready(function () {
/**
external links
**/
externalLinks();
....
Just don't do it. Using target attributes with links presents complications for assistive technology users who may not know another tab has opened. It becomes a bad experience for these users when the back button does not work in the new tab to take them back to the page they started on. This practice can also be disorienting to people with cognitive disorders. It is best to let users decide where links will open.
You need to predict what your users want. Use target="_blank" if you expect your users will want to stay on the site.
For example if a blog post has a link in the middle of the post, it makes sense to open that link in a new tab since you are expecting the reader to return to the page and continue reading.
Some people argue that the reader could simply click "Back" when they wanted to come back to the page,
But new webpages will have more links to webpages that have more links, what happens is that the reader has to "Back" a couple of times to get back to your blog post. Either that, or he ends up "lost" in the myriad of linked pages and couldn't come back to your blogpost (you can be sure that no one wants to open History and find your page again when they are "lost", unless there is a big incentive to coming back to your page).
As it is a governmental website, this is a tricky question. I regularly see disclaimers for external sites on these type of sites. I don't know if this is a standard or not.
I think the answer is probably down to your own opinion, which should probably be based on usability and integrity.
Just make two buttons for your users: One to open in new tab, and another to abandon the current page in favor of the linked page.
[ www.google.com ]
[Open Google in place of THIS page]