Are og:latitude and og:longitude deprecated - facebook-opengraph

I am using the following meta og:latitude and og:longitude on a website.
<meta property='og:latitude' content='...' />
<meta property='og:longitude' content='...' />
This forum post says og:latitude have been replaced by place:location:latitude
Unfortunatly, the link to the Facebook developer documentation is dead.
The Open Graph Protocol official website does not mention either of the syntaxes. I found this article from Facebook developers mentionning it, but it is from 2013, so as the OPG website does not mention it, I am not sure if it is reliable.
My question is, where can I find an recent documentation saying:
og:latitude is deprecated
place:location:latitude is the current standard

While og:latitude mentioned on this page, it is no longer existing on any official FB or OpenGraph documentation page.
There are indeed two questions:
whether it is mentioned on any official source about usage of these properties,
whether these properties are in fact supported.
An answer to the first question i think is no. The answer to the second question you can get only on empirical way: create a page with markup and validate it through official debugger.

Related

How to deprecate a page in Trac?

Some Wiki have a feature to deprecate a page, for example by using templates. I searched on the Trac website and with a google search, without success.
How does one accomplish this in Trac?
I received an answer on the Trac mailing list by Ryan J Ollos:
There are currently no plugins that implement the feature as far as I know, but it would be fairly straightforward to implement. On trac-hacks.org we use a WikiExtras box macro and tag the page as deprecated. Example:
https://trac-hacks.org/wiki/AdminEnumListPlugin
I report here the relevant source code of the page he linked:
{{{#!box warn
**Notice:** This plugin is deprecated in Trac 1.2 and later.
}}}
To be able to tag, one needs the TagsPlugin.

Home page of visually-hidden?

I can't find it on GitHub. Where does the pattern live and grow? I found at least 10+ it's versions, Including: Click to see an Image
The .visually-hidden and its properties are a documented CSS pattern versus a maintained project by any single source. You can find references to it in this 2011 snook.ca article as .element-invisible, this 2015 The A11Y Project article as .visually-hidden, and HTML5 Boilderplate project here as .visuallyhidden.
I believe the Snook.ca article is the first source of this variation of the pattern.
The exact syntax and formatting are a bit different between each reference, but the properties are mostly the same with the exception of some minor differences such as the H5BP project removing legacy Internet Explorer support.
I don't have an exact number, but I am sure this code or variations of it show up in dozens, if not hundreds, of projects.

Is it possible to specify a font version in the google fonts api?

A Google font we use (Pacifico) recently had a rather radical redesign to the capital 'L'. As we use this for our product with a name begging with 'L' this caused a rather radical change in the look to our product.
Digging into it, I noticed that the url for the fonts had changed from
fonts.gstatic.com/s/pacifico/v7/Q_Z9mv4hySLTMoMjnk_rCXYhjbSpvc47ee6xR_80Hnw.woff2
to
fonts.gstatic.com/s/pacifico/v8/Q_Z9mv4hySLTMoMjnk_rCXYhjbSpvc47ee6xR_80Hnw.woff2
but that the previous v7 urls still worked. So, for now, I have added hardcoded font references to that version.
Is it possible, though, to instead link to a particular version of a font?
<link href='https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Pacifico' rel='stylesheet' type='text/css'>
So, somehow specify a version in the above link?
I have tried various guesses, such as:
https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Pacifico&version=7
https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Pacifico&version=v7
https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Pacifico:v7
but to no avail.
The recommended way to stick with a particular version is to self-host it.
Google does not and will not have a versioning option.
The API v7 hack you're using is officially not recommended, and may break.
A Google Fonts employee “davelab6” has been responding to several questions like yours on the Google Fonts github. This question is much like yours and has a brief answer from him. It also links to several other issues with spirited discussion about a similar change.
The upshot is that Google has considered offering a versioning feature and rejected it for several reasons. They say the vast majority of users will be fine with the latest version of a font, and the rest can self-host the version they like.
As for how to self-host, I'm out of my depth, but there's a question about it here with several answers.

Using schema.org or RDFa microformatting with Wordpress?

Wordpress tends to strip out all kinds of code in VISUAL mode, including microformatting. The current WP (3.2.1) seems beyond compatibility with earlier widgets, including wp-RDFa (which I thought showed promise). As discussed in [this Google group post]https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/schemaorg-discussion/E72kDkuguk4/discussion, clients often need to use VISUAL, thus the problem in using any kind of microformatting with Wordpress. Yet we want to start using microformats of some kind. (Damn you wordpress!)
Suggestions please?
Still early days for this plugin, but give it a try...
http://schemaforwordpress.com/

What's the fastest way to get the info I need from MSDN?

In PHP, if I need info on a function I can just type http://php.net/function-name. If the function doesn't exist it performs a search of all functions. The documentation for every function is usually 1 page long and contains all relevant info needed (params, return types, sample code, comments, special cases).
When I search for something on MSDN it usually takes 2-3 clicks before I can even get to what I was looking for.
Since I spend a good amount of time trying to extract very basic information from MSDN, is there a website or service that condenses this information for quicker easier access?
For example, I know for Java there is http://javadocs.org/ which makes it easier to find documentation (http://javadocs.org/Color redirects to http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/java/awt/Color.html)
Does anything like this exist already? Thanks.
Use Google and specify site:msdn.microsoft.com
http://www.google.com/search?q=system.net.mail+site%3Amsdn.microsoft.com
Note: I also use this method to search SO -- Google using site:stackoverflow.com
I asumme you use Visual Studio. So if you want to find out something about ClassX for example, just place the cursor on it, and press F1.
If I do this on the FileInfo class in Visual Studio, I get http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.io.fileinfo.aspx.
I find it much easier to use google and just type in something like "msdn [what I am looking for]". It tends to come up with better results than trying to fiddle my way through MSDN's website.
google ==> site:msdn.microsoft.com + keyword :)
there even is a custom google search for that: MSDN Search
Ask StackOverflow
Use Google
Note that using the search box in MSDN isn't even in most people's answers.
Use an Open Search plug-in for your browser. Like these ones. IE7, Fire Fox (and I think) Chrome use these. Chrome's implementation integrates with the address box, whereas Fire Fox and IE have a specific search dialogue in the top corner.
As others have said, MSDN falls into the category of sites of which it can be said: "Google searches X better than X searches X". Notable peers include Wikipedia and StackOverflow.
To make using google easier, google will allow you create custom search engines that are not only limited to searching within a specific site, but also allow you set up other requirements. For example, if you click on my name to see my SO user profile, you'll see I have MSDN and StackOverflow search links in the box at top right. I don't have it working just yet, but eventually I'll have the StackOverflow search setup to only return questions pages and exclude the user pages or tag pages.
That said, one thing you're missing is that when you're using a Microsoft language, you're probably also using Visual Studio. And if that is the case, the intellisense hints have the information you need 90% of the time. So in that sense it's even better than php, because you don't even need to open a web browser.
MSDN uses the following URL format for the most recent version of the documentation:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/[Namespace.Class.Etc].aspx
In Firefox, you can create a bookmark of the form:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/%s.aspx
Give it a Keyword, i.e. "msdn" and then type in your location bar:
msdn system.web.ui.webcontrols
And FF will take you to:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.ui.webcontrols.aspx
Chrome will also let you set up a search like this, and you can also create a custom search provider for Internet Explorer using the test url:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/TEST.aspx
MSDN Developer Library is vast; I agree that can be cumbersome to find things manually, so I don't bother.
In fact, usually if you just specify the function name, Google will list MSDN on the first two or three options.
There is also the little known ...
http://www.google.com/microsoft.html
... not MSDN specific, but it works. :)

Resources