Search Results

Search found 8 results on 1 pages for 'user568458'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• Loading another domain's content in a modal iframe - acceptable?

  - by user568458

  Is it okay to load another page in an iframe in a modal pop-up window - in terms of legal and ethical standards around displaying 3rd party content? I remember a few years ago there was controversy and a debate about whether it was okay to load another domain's page content on your domain in a full-width iframe, with your site providing a masthead with controls for favouriting, linking etc (e.g. like StumbleUpon). I seem to recall that the consensus was, that it was okay so long as you were clearly in no way claiming ownership of the 3rd party content or attempting to modify the content and so long as there was a 'go to site' button or equivalent; and that sites could ask you to exclude them, but generally speaking, it's an acceptable practice. How acceptable would it be considered to be to load another site's page within a modal (lightbox-like) popup box (following all the above principles: clear attribution and a prominent button that kills the iframe and gives them the 3rd party original)? My expectation would be that it would follow the same principles, and be acceptable so long as these conditions were met. Note that I'm asking about the likely legitimate responses of the 3rd party sites and possible legal position, not about usability or UX. I'm aware that this should never ever ever ever ever be the standard way external links are loaded, and that 99% of the time linking to external content like this would be terrible for usability. My specific use case is one of those 1% of cases where loading a separate page in this tab actually wouldn't be the expected behaviour of a link: an interactive data visualisation tool that also acts as a 'browser' of external content (science papers underlying the data it navigates). All other links within the interactive will change something while staying on the same page. If the user clicked one of these external links by mistake (as people often do, even when they are clearly, noisily labelled) and then had to back-button back, they would lose their fine-grained position in the interactive tool (jquery bbq hashchanges being not appropriate for all elements of the tool). New window/tab will simply open the target page on the 3rd party domain. Opening a new window/tab would also be an alternative option (and has its own disadvantages) - my question is, whether this is an alternative that could be considered (in terms of acceptable practice around intellectual property etc), irrespective of which option is best for UX: which is something we'll decide the proper way, based on actual UX testing.

  Read the article

• Is hidden content (display: none;) -indexed- by search engines? [closed]

  - by user568458

  Possible Duplicate: How bad is it to use display: none in CSS? We've established on this site before (in this question) that, since there are so many legitimate uses for hiding content with display: none; when creating interactive features, that sites aren't automatically penalised for content that is hidden this way (so long as it doesn't look algorithmically spammy). Google's Webmaster guidelines also make clear that a good practice when using content that is initially legitimately hidden for interactivity purposes is to also include the same content in a <noscript> tag, and Google recommend that if you design and code for users including users with screen readers or javascript disabled, then 9 times out of 10 good relevant search rankings will follow (though their specific advice seems more written for cases where javascript writes new content to the page). JavaScript: Place the same content from the JavaScript in a tag. If you use this method, ensure the contents are exactly the same as what’s contained in the JavaScript, and that this content is shown to visitors who do not have JavaScript enabled in their browser. So, best practice seems pretty clear. What I can't find out is, however, the simple factual matter of whether hidden content is indexed by search engines (but with potential penalties if it looks 'spammy'), or, whether it is ignored, or, whether it is indexed but with a lower weighting (like <noscript> content is, apparently). (for bonus points it would be great to know if this varies or is consistent between display: none;, visibility: hidden;, etc, but that isn't crucial). This is different to the other questions on display:none; and SEO - those are about good and bad practice and the answers are discussions of good and bad practice, I'm interested simply in the factual 'Yes or no' question of whether search engines index, or ignore, content that is in display: none; - something those other questions' answers aren't totally clear on. One other question has an answer, "Yes", supported by a link to an article that doesn't really clear things up: it establishes that search engines can spot that text is hidden, it discusses (again) whether hidden text causes sites to be marked as spam, and ultimately concludes that in mid 2011, Google's policy on hidden text was evolving, and that they hadn't at that time started automatically penalising display:none; or marking it as spam. It's clear that display: none; isn't always spam and isn't always treated as spam (many Google sites use it...): but this doesn't clear up how, or if, it is indexed. What I will do will be to follow the guidelines and make sure that all the content that is initially hidden which regular users can explore using javascript-driven interactivity is also structured in way that noscript/screenreader users can use. So I'm not interested in best practice, opinions etc because best practice seems to be really clear: accessibility best practices boosts SEO. But I'd like to know what exactly will happen: whether any display: none; content I have alongside <noscript> or otherwise accessibility-optimised content will be be ignored, or indexed again, or picked up to compare against the <noscript> content but not indexed... etc.

  Read the article

• Sent items listed by sender's name (my name!) not recipient in Outlook for Mac 2011

  - by user568458

  Outlook 2011 on a Mac (OSX7 Lion), on a (mostly PC) office network using Microsoft Exchange server. In Outlook 2011, in the network "Sent Items" folder, all emails are listed showing the sender's name (my name), not the recipients' names. That means every single email is headed with my own name, like this: My Name 08/09/2012 Some subject line [flag] My Name 08/09/2012 Re: Another subject line [flag] My Name 07/09/2012 Re: different subject line [flag] My Name 07/09/2012 different subject line [flag] ...and so on. There's no clue at all as to who these emails were to, until I open each and every one. I guess it's reassuring to be told that every email that I sent was sent by me... and if I was ever to forget my own name while browsing my sent emails folder, it'd be super useful... But it's not very helpful for navigating sent emails. Is this normal for Office for Mac 2011? How can I fix this, so that the list shows the recipients' names instead of endlessly reminding me of my own name? Things I've found while researching this: This can also happen in Outlook for Windows. On Windows, it's easily fixed by resetting the field. That method doesn't work on Mac because the fields can't be selected separately. It seems this can also happen in Apple Mail too, and a lot of people seem stumped by this. I can't find anything on this specific to Outlook 2011 or Outlook for Mac in general. A simple guide on how to fix this would be the best answer, but I'd also welcome any knowledgable thoughts from Microsoft Exchange Server people on whether this sounds like an Outlook settings issue which I can fix on my machine, or some issue relating to how the Mac gets data from the server and network. The fact that Apple Mail users have encountered the same issue with no apparent fix makes me think the problem might be in the network rather than the mail client - but that's way beyond my limited knowledge of these things. I don't know whether the local ("On my computer") Sent Items folder has the same problem, as it's configured so that no emails except drafts are ever stored in these local folders. Drafts saved locally are listed by recipient as expected.

  Read the article

• Wiimote accelerometer input on Windows? (in 2013 - Glovepie alternative?)

  - by user568458

  There were a few options for getting accelerometer input into Windows using a Nintendo Wiimote. As of mid 2013, these projects seem to be dead, corrupted with malware, or both. Are there any tools out there that can do this that are still available (and not full of malware)? Quick roundup of the options that used to exist, or that still exist but aren't suitable: Glovepie, which used to be the most recommended option, appears to be dead: it's own website hacked, its creator's googlepages page full of strange stuff that sounds like hacker-humour about the end of the world... (I'd rather not link to them, very dubious stuff...), and lots of forum threads asking if it's a dead project with comments along the lines of "I heard that the author intends to return to it" dated 2011... Wiiuse seems to be dead: its sourceforge page simply says "Error.", its own website has turned into a squatter page. There apparently was an extension for Autohotkey that allowed Wiimote input, but I've seen warnings that this too is now full of malware (see final commentin above link) Everything else I can find about using Wiimotes as input on Windows - for example, Johnny Lee Cheng's work - seems to be exclusively about using infrared or sensor bar, or tied to a specific purpose (e.g. FPS gaming). My main interest is in the accelerometer, and buttons if possible (although something that supports the IR stuff too would be ideal). Is there anything that works for getting Wiimote accelerometer input into Windows that is reliable and not a malware-fest? If anyone's interested in "Why?", it's to use the Wiimote as an audio / midi controller: to use movement, pitch, roll etc to modulate lots of different sound variables at once with one hand. Wiimotes are great for this, and Glovepie used to be the standard way to make this work (e.g. see for example this tutorial, and this one, ignore the unrelated video; I've also seen musicians using wiimote/glovepie setups at gigs, creating some really unique sounds). As of 2013, however, Glovepie seems to be a dead and thoroughly hacked project, sadly. Is there anything else? With or without MotionPlus is fine (with would be better). If anyone knows of any worthy alternatives to Wiimotes in terms of price and quality that can be made to work with a PC, that would also be great: but in my research I coulnd't find any (here's a link to someone reaching the same conclusion). found some potentially relevant stuff here, not had time to test any of it yet though - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2984450/using-accelerometer-in-wiimote-for-physics-practicals

  Read the article

• Tomcat Solr times out

  - by user568458

  (Plesk 10.4 centos 5.8 linux apache2 server, with Tomcat5 on port 8080 and Apache Solr) I get "The connection has timed out" on requesting domain.com:8080 or www.domain.com:8080 or ip.ad.dr.ess:8080 Every reason I can find why this might be seems not to be the case: Plesk thinks Tomcat is running fine and lists it as an active service. The firewall currently has an accept all rule on port 8080. There's nothing relevant in the catalina tomcat logs (/var/log/tomcat5) - just some stuff from last time tomcat was started. There's no record at all of the requests that fail. netstat -lnp | grep 8080 gives the following, which I beleive means Tomcat is listening to requests to port 8080 on all ip addresses from any ip and any port (please correct me if I'm wrong): : tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:8080 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 4018/java This covers every cause of this time out that I can find - so I must be missing something fundamental. It seems Tomcat is running, listening to the right port, is getting an appropriate IP address, is not obstructed by a firewall and is not failing after receiving a request in a way which would be recorded in the logs (so I believe it can't be out of memory, or anything like that). I'm all out of ideas on how to continue debugging this. I must have overlooked something obvious. Can anyone help?

  Read the article

• Green flickering pixels that move with black images

  - by user568458

  Strange question... Occasionally, on my LCD screen, pixels that should be black flicker rapidly and constantly between black and green, about 4 flickers a second. The crazy part is, unlike dead/stuck pixels, they are relative to content on the screen and move with it. For example, I might be looking at a web page with a picture that has lots of black. There might be a couple of green flashing pixels in that black that shouldn't be there. I scroll the page, and the green flickering pixels move with the image. It seems that everyphysical pixel is fine, but somehow something interprets part of the image in a way that causes flickering green... It's not just in a web browser. My first thought was to blame a trolling blogger cunningly uploading an animated gif that simulates a failing pixel... but it happens in a wide range of applications. It seems to occur randomly, other than that it seems to only occur in areas of pure black, and it's always pure 100% green. It happens rarely enough that it's not a big deal, but it's such a strange problem it bugs me. I can't find any info on anything like this. I'm not even sure if it's hardware or software. Any ideas? (windows 7 laptop connected to LCD by DVI to HDMI cable)

  Read the article

• Create a PDF that defaults to flip on short edge when printed double-sided

  - by user568458

  We're creating a 2-page PDF brochure with a target audience who will print it on their regular office or home printers. If it is printed on a double-sided printer (common in offices), it'll come out correctly if set manually by the user to "Flip on short edge", but will come out with the second page upside down if default settings are used (flip on long edge). Our target audience aren't very tech-literate, and we've found that even within our own office network there is variation in the location of the 'Flip on short edge' setting - so it isn't realistic to give everyone who downloads the PDF instructions on how to change this setting or to expect everyone to find out how to change the setting off their own backs. So, when creating a PDF (ideally using Adobe InDesign or Acrobat, but if other software or hacking is needed that's fine...), is there a way to configure the PDF file itself so that when printed double-sided with default settings, it flips on the short edge? If possible, it'll be useful supplementary info to know how reliable any such methods are across different PDF readers (e.g. Adobe Reader, Acrobat, Mac Preview, inbuilt browser readers (e.g. chrome), FoxIt, etc). If questions about content creation like this aren't a great fit here, feel free to migrate it to the graphic design stackexchange site - this question seems to fall half way between the two sites

  Read the article

• Why would a process monitoring script use exit 1; on finding no problems?

  - by user568458

  General question: On a Linux (Centos) server, if a process monitoring script run by cron is set to close with exit 1; rather than exit 0; on finding that everything is okay and that no action is needed, is that a mistake? Or are there legitimate reasons for calling exit 1; instead of exit 0; on the "Everything's fine, no action needed" condition? exit 0; on finding no problems seems to me to be more appropriate. But maybe there's something I'm not aware of. For example, maybe there's something specific to Cron? Or maybe there's a convention in process monitoring scripts that 'failure' means 'this script failed to need to fix a problem' (rather than what I would expect which is that exit 1; would mean 'the process being monitored has failed'?) My specific case: I'm looking at a process monitoring script written by my web hosting company. By process monitoring script, I mean a script executed by Cron on a regular basis that checks if an important system process is running, and if it isn't running, takes actions such as mailing an administrator or restarting the process. Here's the (generalised) structure of their script, for a service running on port 8080 (in this case, Apache Tomcat): SERVICE=$(/usr/sbin/lsof -i tcp:8080 | wc -l); if [ $SERVICE != 0 ]; then exit 1; else #take action fi Seems simple enough even for someone with limited knowledge like me, except the exit 1; part seems odd. As I understand it, exit 0; closes a program and signifies to the parent that executed the program that everything is fine, exit n; where n0 and n<127 signifies that there has been some kind of error or problem. Here, their script seems to go against that rule - it calls exit 1; in the condition where everything is fine, and doesn't exit after taking remedial action in the problem condition. To me, this looks like a mistake - but my experience in this area is limited. Are there cases where calling exit 1; in the "Everything's fine, no action needed" condition is more appropriate than calling exit 0;? Or is it a mistake? Wider context is pretty simple. It's a Centos VPS, running Plesk. The script is being called by Cron via Plesk's "Scheduled tasks" Cron manager. There's no custom layer between Cron and this script that would respond in an unusual way to the exit call. It's a fairly average, almost out-of-the box Plesk-managed Centos VPS (in so far as there is such a thing). The process being monitored by this script is Apache Tomcat.

  Read the article

1