Often I will want printed versions of docs so I can read them in comfort, without straining my eyes reading text on a screen and sitting in an uncomfortable office chair for long periods of time.
Sometimes docs, like the Bootstrap docs, are important to be printed with the formatting / page css included (duh - it's Bootstrap), since that's what the docs are there for... to show you how to style things.
How do I get a printed copy of the bootstrap docs, for instance, the css page, while preserving the layout and styling?
I have found a somewhat inglorious workaround - when printing, choose A3 or Tabloid paper size with Landscape orientation. Also, you may need to print the entire page instead of just a region of text to get the formatting just right.
These paper sizes more closely resemble a monitor size / resolution, so the page will print with more of the CSS preserved as shown on a larger computer screen.
I would have answered this on the previously-asked question here, but it was Closed due to being "off-topic".
Related
I'm optimizing the speed of a WordPress website (on mobile only for the moment), with success except for CLS. The CLS became extremely high after optimizing CSS delivery (with WP-Rocket), but I don't see any layout shifts, even when I use Dev Tools (performance test). (on mobile)
Here’s the example : https://trustmyscience.com/israel-a-pratiquement-eradique-la-covid-19/
Results here, with CSS delivery optimization
So it seems to be an invisible layout shift, that Lighthouse perceive as a real layout shift. Lighthouse shows me the problem comes from <div class="entry-content body-color clearfix link-color-wrap progresson">. So, it seems to be related to some "wrapping" of the all article content, that maybe shifts into the background (without being visible), because of some CSS rules maybe ?
Here, the element with the highest layout shift
The element with the highest layout shift (detail)
When I deactivate CSS delivery optimization, CLS go back to almost 0 (but LCP is too high).
Results WITHOUT CSS delivery optimization
I need this CSS delivery optimisation because of LCP importance, but I also now need to solve this issue because of CLS introduction in Core Web Vitals, and need to find what Lighthouse is detecting as a LS. Also, maybe, Lighthouse needs a correction for that ? As it isn't a visible layout shift...
Do you have any idea on how to solve this ? Or do you think I need to reach LS developers to show them this ?
Thank you in advance for your help.
Regards,
The CLS is visible, it's the font.
Don't you notice that when you visit the page, the text gets resized? That's a common cause of CLS.
How to solve?
Serve your fonts locally. Do not use any plug-in like OMGF. Do it manually.
Download the fonts. Choose 2 fonts, one for body, another for headings. You won't need bold, italic, or bold+italic fonts. These will be applied by user's browser.
Convert to woff2 (only woff2 is enough, didn't face any issues)
Upload it to your server
Add font face CSS to declare the fonts
Apply the fonts using CSS elements
Disable Google fonts if you're using any WP theme or builder
Preload the fonts
This will solve the CLS problem, will also reduce the Total Blocking Time.
You might gain a bit in performance by self-hosting the fonts instead of making a call to the Google Fonts API, but fonts are not the main issue here. Javascript is.
There is a lot of Javascript on this website, so the main thread is busy downloading it, parsing it and executing it.
I ran both Lighthouse (with Clear Storage and Simulated throttling enabled) and WebPageTest with a Moto 4G profile.
As you can see from Chrome DevTools and WebPageTest, roughly 56% of the processing time spent on the main thread is due to scripting. Do you really need all of that Javascript?
Here is what I noticed in the Chrome DevTools Performance panel:
There seems to be 5 front-end.js scripts (and 1 min-front.js). Are they duplicates?
Do you need animations with gsap and ScrollTrigger?
Aren't lazyload.min.js and areimagesloaded.js doing the same thing? (I might be wrong)
Are you importing the entire lodash library? If so, try importing just the functions you are actually using.
Do you really need a polyfill for Intersection Observer? I think that all modern browsers support it natively nowadays.
CLS is basically the sum of all unexpected layout shifts that occur on a page. As you can see from the dashed orange line in the chart below, the 4 .woff2 font files contribute to the CLS: the first layout shift occurs as soon as the fonts are fetched.
But as I said, I would focus on removing all unnecessary Javascript. In particular, I would examine third-party JS like the one coming from choices.consentframework.com, which takes 1730ms to load and represents 25% of the content size (see below).
After JavaScript, focus on the images.
The Performance panel in Chrome DevTools shows a lot of requests for images. Are you fetching only the images that are in the viewport, or all the images that are on the page?
Most of these images are WebP and seem already optimized, but there are a few GIFs, which are really bad for performance. It seems that these GIFs are served by https://www.viously.com/ (I guess it's an Ad Server, it's the first time I see it).
Last but not least, double-check that all of your <img> and <video> have size and width attributes set. Images and videos are replaced elements with intrinsic dimensions, and forgetting to set sizes for images in your HTML is a common cause of layout shifts.
See also this article by Addy Osmani for a few more tips on how to optimize CLS.
I've been trying different tiling WM's to see which one best fits my needs. Every time I try a new one, it looks good but I find other things that don't quite work the way I like. My requirements have evolved as I go. Initially, I didn't want to get into Awesome because having to learn Lua is not on my wish list but maybe I should give it a try IF it can do what I want better than the other tiling WM's out there.
I'm going to as specific as I can about what I want. I am running a 3440x1440 monitor. I want to use as much vertical space as possible (meaning, a full width, persistent but mostly empty status bar is not an option, but I do like the notification area and a date/time).
I understand it may not do everything exactly the way I want, which is oke. If it does more or less most of what I want I can weigh my options between Awesome and other tiling WM's (actually, only i3 which is what I'm using now but I'm open to better suggestions). I would very much appreciate it if people don't just say no to something it can't do, but say "no, but it can do ...". In other words, feel free to suggest alternatives that might be helpful as well.
Divide the screen in 3 columns, initially 30/45/25, with the right column split horizontally; Fully adjustable and resizable as needed during my work session;
Persistent layout; when closing the last application in a tile, I don't want that tile to disappear and the remaining tiles to resize. Just show an empty space and leave all tiles as they are.
tabbed tiles, so I see which applications are running in a tile (similar to i3).
Resizable tiles with the keyboard into 1 direction; When making the middle column/tile wider, I want that into a specific direction into another tile and leave the other side alone.
Certain applications I want to always launch into a specific tile. For instance, terminals always go into the right-most column top/bottom, browser/spotify always into the middle, atom/IDE always into the left. Some applications should always be floating. Obviously I want to be able to send them to a different tile after launch.
I don't want a 100% width status bar. It will be mostly empty which is a waste of screen estate. Preferably, I'd like a statusbar part of a tile, for example in the right-most tile, resizing with it. Otherwise I'd like it to be fixed to 30% and allow tiles which are not beneath it to use the full height of the screen. My reason for a statusbar is mute; I actually only want a notification area and a date time permanently visible. I don't need a "start menu", dmenu or similar is perfect, which I believe it has integrated.
Many thanks in advance!
The general answer is "Awesome configuration is code and it can do whatever you want". But there is a catch. Can Awesome be configured like you describe? Yes, totally. There is at least 2 distributions coming close enough (mine[1] and worron[2]) (at least for the tiling workflow, not the look).
The "catch" is that the workflow you describe isn't really the "Awesome way". Awesome is usually used as an automatic tiler. You have layouts that describe a workflow (code, web, internet) and manage the clients according to their programming. Manual tile management is rarely necessary once you have proper layouts. That doesn't mean you can't, I did, but it might be worth thinking outside the box and see if you can automate your workflow a bit further.
Also, the default layout system isn't very modern and makes it hard to implement the features you requested. My layout system (see link below) can be used as a module or as a branch and supports all features described above. Awesome is extremely configurable and it's components can be replaced by modules.
https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/pull/644
The layout "serialization" documentation is here:
https://elv13.github.io/libraries/awful.layout.html#awful.layout.suit.dynamic.manual
It is similar to i3 but has more layouts and containers. As for the "leaving blank space" part, it is configured using the fill_strategy:
https://awesomewm.org/doc/api/classes/wibox.layout.ratio.html#wibox.layout.ratio.inner_fill_strategy
As a word of conclusion, I would note that what you ask is "work exactly like i3". If you want such thing, well, use i3. Awesome is a window manager framework. Its goal and purpose is to create a customized desktop shell / WM. If it's what you want, then go ahead and learn it, nothing else can come close to the possibility and the level of control you can get out of it. However it takes time and effort to get to the point where you have "your own perfect desktop". Our users perfect desktops:
https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/1395
[1] https://gfycat.com/SmallTerribleAdamsstaghornedbeetle
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yNALqST1-Y
The WM your are looking for is herbstluftwm (hlwm). Its a manual tiling window manager. The tiles which you are talking about are called frames in hlwm. Each frame can contain multiple windows. A frame can also be empty. Only if you kill a frame the other frames will automatically resize. You can add new frames vertically and horizontally and resize them. Each frame can also have a different layout to organize the windows inside. The layout you are looking for is max. This will stack the windows inside a frame on each other. It doesn't show you tabs like i3 however. hlwm allows you to create rules to open certain applications always in certain frames and workspaces. hlwm doesn't have a statusbar buildin. I personally like to use tint2. It can be used as a replacement for your requirement to see running applications as tabs.
I am using the most excellent PHP library ePub to on-the-fly create digital books from HTML stored in my database.
As these are part of a collection, I am including a cover image for every book. Everything works fine in the code but depending upon the device/software interpreting the ePub, the image may get cut off. I have seen 600x800 pixels as a recommended size, but it still cuts it off (for example in Aldiko in Android). Is there a standard size that is recommended in the documentation?
Honestly, I would love a good and readable recommendation for documentation of the ePub format.
So, it seems that Aldiko has the problem, and not the other e-Readers I have tested (Calibre, Overdrive).
After trying various ratios, I found that Aldiko only respects the height:100% style I have called out in the height direction. It doesn't scale the image, only sets the height at 100% of the screen width. I am going to have to go with this being a bug in Aldiko, and keep the recommended 600x800 ratio for maximum resolution.
Another interesting thing I discovered as well; the Aldiko reader didn't recover as well from non-standard HTML. On one of the database entries, a <style> tag inside the <body> disappeared, but the style text did not. This is not the same for the other e-Readers.
The best general advice I found on the internet is Preparing Images for Ebooks Project (PIFEP).
We will soon be producing EPUB files to distribute cultural and scientific papers. We would like them to render similarily across devices, but we're afraid it will be similar to what browsers were a few years back (hell). Is creating validating EPUB files enough to ensure rendering will be similar across devices? What are the do's and dont's in this regard?
Yep, it's like browsers a few years back.
ePub 2, you're reasonably consistent across devices provided you don't do anything special at all.
ePub 3 — well, the devices that support it at the moment (iBooks, Kindle Fire (sort-of-but-not-really), Nook, and a couple of others) do fairly different things. Part of the reason for that is ePub 3 is largely built off the back of HTML5, which is not exactly standardized across browsers at the moment anyway.
And the problem for you may well be that you want to do ePub 3 because of its MathML support, although it will depend on the kind of scientific papers you're producing.
Liz Castro did a presentation earlier this year at O'Reilly's Tools of Change conference about ePub in the wild (note the PDF linked at this page; there's lots of examples of what I'm about to list below). My brief notes on what is supported by various readers are:
Everyone supports:
bold and italic
font-size
text-indent
top and bottom margins
images
Caveats: NOOK overrides defaults with its own (not publisher defaults), and bold only shows up in certain user-selected fonts
Most support:
font family
small caps
Leading
Left and right margins
float and width
text wrap
borders, backgrounds
color
Once you start talking about audio/video overlays, discretionary page breaks, drop-caps, and other neat stuff you have to start doing media-queries, or deciding to target particular platforms and leave others behind. For example, you might just go for Kindle Fire & iBooks at this point, and leave others out, but that's going to be a business decision for you to make down the track.
In CSS Sprites you will often find padding between each image. I believe the idea is so that if the page is resized then one image won't bleed into another.
I think this depends on the different types of browser zoom (best explained by Jeff).
However, I haven't been able to see this behaviour in my tests. Is this only a problem with older browsers? (I havent been able to test with IE6 at the current time so I'm counting that as 'old').
Should I still worry about leaving space? Its kind of a pain.
For instance :
A CSS Sprite I found for AOL has
padding between each image : VIEW
but The Daily Show decided not to
bother : VIEW
It shouldn't need to be padded, but when zoomed, especially in IE8 (betas more than the RC), there is image bleeding if there is no padding.
Best example is to go to Google.com -> Search, and zoom... you'll start to see "underlines" at the bottom right of the image as the zooming rounds up/down.
In theory, a 1px padding on all sides of a sprite should be fine.
Here's the sprite from Google (images)...
But when zoomed, the +,-,x icons bleed into the main Google logo.
Basically the answer is yes. Two years to the day after I asked this question will see the release of IE9. IE9 has this problem just as much - if not more than any other browser...
It's pretty infuriating because it's such a simple thing to fix.
With iPads increasing in marketshare - its's pretty essential to at least have a half decent experience with zooming un-uniform amounts.
I am going to have to put a single pixel border around every image to match the background color of the adjacent element (potentially different on each side). Fortunately I auto-generate all my csssprites based on an .xml file - so I can do this programatically without too much hastle. It's still a huge pain though...
Simon - My experience is that this is certainly still a problem.
In response to your second question, why not use transparent padding? (Perhaps you are still supporting ie6 and this is non-trivial, in which case, I'm really sorry).
Speaking of the older browsers (those using text zoom), you don't always need padding.
The main difference between your two examples is that the Daily Show sprite already includes the menu item's text in the image itself.
When using text zoom, the AOL menu items could stretch out vertically due to the larger font size, and the menu text might even wrap to two lines. To accommodate for such eventualities, those icons need a little padding to ensure they don't bleed. Typically, you'd just try to make sure it doesn't bleed on any of IE6's five text sizes.
Since The Daily Show's menu doesn't contain any (visible) HTML text its size won't be affected by text zoom (though you might need a line-height: 0; or so to be sure), so it doesn't need any padding.
As scunliffe already showed, browsers using page zoom may need sprites to have a little padding due to rounding errors.