I'm currently in the process of writing a larger DocBook document, and while it looks decent enough, I've been asked to improve the accessibility of it. After reading the documentation I figured, "that looks simple enough, I'll just add an <alt> element in there and that'll fix everything!" ...Needless to say this wasn't the case.
The way I've been including the keys images up 'till now;
<inlinemediaobject>
<imageobject>
<imagedata format="png" fileref="figs/key-down.png"/>
</imageobject>
<alt>down</alt>
</inlinemediaobject>
I opted for a graphic element over using <keycap> in this case as it makes the keys in the document look closer to the real thing. However just to cover all my bases I'm currently testing the following, but that didn't work either:
<keycap><alt>down</alt>▼</keycap>
The screen reading software still can't read my alt-text.
Do I need to do any other type of configuration to get this to work in screen reading software, aside from simply running fop with the -a flag?
I agree that making a document accessible is much more than just adding alt text. However, it's a good start, so to answer your question, I think that instead of you need to use the textobject element, for example:
<inlinemediaobject>
<imageobject>
<imagedata format="png" fileref="figs/key-down.png"/>
</imageobject>
<textobject>
<para>Icon: key down</para>
</textobject>
</inlinemediaobject>
Of course, this is two years later, but maybe it will help other viewers.
Related
I am able to parse the markdwon with the help of remark and remark-html. How can I add syntax highlighting features for the code element?
I've been searched for TWO whole days trying to use remark/rehype ecosystem on syntax highlighting which is way more complex to use. I'm still working on searching, it's better to avoid remark/rehype ecosystem and try another method.
Here I share list of my search, just give you some subjective perspective so that you won't waste you too much time on things that not working. None of them will work as you expected, and their sample code are obscure or just broken codes.
https://github.com/remarkjs/remark-highlight.js
They move to support rehype. Are you a big fan of them wanna move as well?
https://github.com/sergioramos/remark-prism
You will get this error: Module parse failed: Unexpected character '�'
https://github.com/torchlight-api/remark-torchlight
They states on their website: 🚨 This client is still very much a work in progress. Please open issues! 🚨View it on github at github.com/torchlight-api/remark and this link is invalid.
https://github.com/rehypejs/rehype-highlight
It force you to use rehpye althought you can you remark-rehype for you to transfer easily. However, debug your code once you encounter some error will be helpless.
sample code use third-pary v-file to read file showing their code is working but not. and it reads html file not markdown file.
It's hard for you to grasp their concept to use their plugins to easily. It waste most of you valuable time to think what they think.
I give up remark/rehype ecosystem and stay away from them. Good luck! :)
I've been developing a lot of small web development projects in various IDEs, and find myself laboriously typing in jslint configuration headers to silence JSLint. Its warnings and errors are all valid, and I want to keep JSLint in my work cycle, but I spin up 2-3 isolated environments a day, sometimes from generators in Yeoman, other times by hand. These all end up with gripes from JSLint that require the following in every .js file:
/*jslint browser:true*/
/*global require,yada,yada,yada*/
JSHint has a wonderful feature whereby you can declare all these in a parent folder using the body of the .jshintrc file. Does JSLint have something like this? It seems like such an obvious addition, but I can find nothing like this which will work across IDEs (Visual Studio, IntelliJ, Brackets, Sublime Text,...).
I found this for .NET, but I find Visual Studio heavy for projects I might only spend a couple hours on and then throw away (https://jslintnet.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=JSLint.NET%20Settings).
Does someone have some insight on this?
Edit: (See my new answer below.)
I think the quick answer is that setting global settings for every file you JSLint is the job of your IDE or favorite text editor. That is, JSLint is essentially just a big javascript file. It doesn't care about file paths, etc, and won't look for a server-wide config.
I mean, you can change the options used when JSLint is called, but that essentially reduces to the same problem you have now.
So then the question is, if you don't like Visual Studio, what tools do you use? In VS, I've used this tool and liked it a good deal. I think that's different (as in not forked or related, but I could be wrong) than the one you found. In Sublime Text, there are two. I've been using Darren Deridder's, but I get the impression that it's the less popular of the two. Etc etc.
So this isn't a javascript/JSLint question so much as a JSLint wrapper question.
It should be said that JSLint's code is very clean, and it's easy to rig up your own process using Node or something similar. I've done it with JavaScript.NET, though I'd use Node if I was doing it again.
And I'd also suggest you consider keeping the file-by-file JSLint headers. I tend to do so, and it keeps your use "excuses" to a minimum, keeping your code tighter. It's way too easy to get a giant /*global ...*/ header line, for instance, if you have a lot of shared config info. It also means that when someone else uses a "shell" tool different than yours to JSLint your files, you know they're using pretty close to your intended accepted behaviors.
So the literal answer to your question is, "No, JSLint doesn't inherently support a box-wide config file." The longer answer is, "Tell us where you do like to work." ;^)
EDIT: Debated staying out of the usual 'Hint vs. 'Lint discussion, but I will quickly say I like how you're thinking. JSLint is more draconian, but JSLinted code means something more specific than code that's been JSHinted. I won't argue that more specific means better, per se, but I will say that I see JSLint's draconian-ness to be an advantage. It might not be the only way to do something, but there's nothing that Crockford's telling you that's a bad idea, and it's nice to get familiar with those conventions. In the parlance of my times, Crockfords's not wrong, Walter.
EDIT 2: So Brackets looks like it's come a long way since I last used it. Seems to have JSLint by default.
It looks like you can set global JSLint options using the jslint.options setting in your preferences file (and there might be/have been a goal to make that a more interactive UI eventually), like this...
{
"debug.showErrorsInStatusBar": false,
"styleActiveLine": true,
"jslint.options": { "sloppy":true, "white":true, "browser": true }
}
And it does allow settings at the top of the file to override these settings.
This really is approaching a golden age of text editors. I still fall back on VIm a lot, but mainly live VS and Sublime Text, with even jEdit, Coda, and PhpStorm for specific tasks. Looks like this might be my new Sublime for Node & html frontend dev. The quick CSS edit is wonderful, though bindings will complicate it. Thanks!
While the previous excepted answer is an excellent one (and many thanks to its author for making it even better over time!), the world has moved on from JSLint. I'd recommend to anyone reading this very old question that you seriously consider chucking JSLint out of your development cycle in favor of its very effective successor, ESLint. For an even better experience, I'd suggest taking a hard look at the ES7 vs. TypeScript paths, with TSLint being your best option for TypeScript linting.
However, for the development experience that trumps even these modern libraries, go directly for Prettier.js. With Prettier, your linting woes become irrelevant, since Prettier will rewrite your code in an opinionated manner every time it's run.
For the best results with Prettier, add the packages "lint-staged" and "husky" to your dev-dependencies, then add the following in your package.json:
"husky": {
"hooks": {
"pre-commit": "lint-staged"
}
},
"lint-staged": {
"*.{js,json,css,md}": [
"prettier --write",
"git add"
]
},
This will force Prettier's auto-linting behavior to run every time Git's commit command runs.
I can't tell you what a relief using Prettier has been for the front-end development teams and projects I am responsible for. We've gone from code reviews bleeding with linting correction comments to zero almost immediately. Feedback from the teams has been universally positive.
The only modification I've made has been to the tabs-vs.-spaces setting. I've modified my .prettierrc.json file to select tabs instead of spaces, because use of spaces at different widths causes dirty git merge histories. You can't control the indentation of 250+ developers spread over multiple hemispheres, some of whom drop in and out of the project before you even know their names. So, setting tabs as the default indentation allows all of the developers to operate with the indentation they're comfortable with without modifying lines in Git. Here's my .prettierrc.json file, with some other slight modifications:
{
"arrowParens": "always",
"bracketSpacing": false,
"singleQuote": true,
"useTabs": true,
"trailingComma": "none"
}
I'm looking at requiring my team to document their code more thoroughly for some major upcoming projects and to make life a little less painful, I am steering towards XML documentation generators such as Sandcastle, Doxygen or Box Live Documenter.
What are the key considerations I should keep in mind when evaluating the best option and what experiences have led you to a particular decision?
For me the key considerations would be:
Fully automated: Can it be set up in such a way so that pretty much
no outside work is required to
create or edit the documentation.
Fully styled: Can the documentation be fully styled so
that it looks great in a wiki or pdf
after it’s generated. I should be
able to change colors, font sizes,
layouts, etc.
Good Filtering: Can I select only the items I want to be
generated. I should be able to
filter the namespaces, file types,
classes, etc.
Customization: Can I include headers, footers, custom elements,
etc.
I found Doxygen could do all of this. Our workflow is as follows:
Developer makes a change to the code
They update the documentation tags right above the code they just changed
We click a generate button
Doxygen will then extract all the XML documentation from the code, filter it to only include the classes and methods we want, and apply the CSS styling we’ve pre-made for it. Our end result is an internal wiki that looks the way we want, and doesn’t require editing.
Extra: We have all our projects in various git repositories. We pull all these down to one root folder and generate the docs form this root folder..
Would be interested to know how others are automating even further..?
Who is paying for the documentation and why? (is the system stable enough, does it add enough value)
Who is going to read it, and why is she not using a more effective communication channel?
(if correct mostly distance in time/place)
Who is going to keep it up to date.
When are you going to destroy it? (Automatically if it hasn't been read or updated in the past three months?)
I mostly prefer better code to make my life less painful, over more documentation, but I like scenario & unit tests and a high level architecture description.
[edit] Documentation costs time and money to write and keep up to date. JavaDoc style documentation has a serious detrimental effect on the amount of code simultaneously visible and might be a good idea for the developers using the code, but not for those writing it.
So, I've got a bunch of markup-pages delivered that I am supposed to style. Problem is that tags are all in uppercase, even though the doctype declares it as xhtml. Not only is it ugly and hurting my eyes, it's also wrong, isn't it?
Is there a good way, perhaps a coda (my preferred tool), plug-in, or online service that can do this for me? Or can you do a regexp search-and-replace in coda, and if so, how? (I'll be the first to admit that regexp isn't my cup o'Java.)
You could try figuring out how to do it in RegExp (something a little like /<([^>]*)>/g would be a bit too simplistic, but its a start) but that still presents problems. Coda's RegExp just does find-and-replace so I don't think you'd be able to do a "toLowerCase()" on each item found before replacing with Coda - you'd have to use some scripting language.
Another option is to download the W3C's Tidy application which I believe has "to uppercase" and "to lowercase" options, though I've not used it. It's here: http://tidy.sourceforge.net/#binaries (hasn't been updated in a while)
I'm currently looking at different solutions getting 2 dimensional mathematical formulas into webpages. I think that the wikipedia solution (generating png images from LaTeX sourcecode) is good enough until we get support for MathML in webbrowsers.
I suddenly realized that it might be possible to create a Google Charts API equivalent for mathformulas. Has this already been done? Is it even possible due to the strange characters involved in LaTeX-code?
I would like to hit an url like latex2png.org/api/?eq="E = mc^2" and get the following response:
edit:
Thanks for the answers sofar. However, I am already aware of several tools to generate png images from latex source code (both online and from my commandline), but what I was looking for was a simple way to get the image via an Http GET request. Perhaps such a service does not exist.
Update
As #hughes (and others) pointed out, the previous Google Chart API has been deprecated.
The example I wrote still works as of Sept 2015, but a new one shall be used now (documentation):
Old answer
Google Chart can do it (Documentation):
http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=tx&chl=%5CLaTeX
I'm using this with Google Docs, because it doesn't support math yet.
chart.apis.google with background color changed
https://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=tx&chf=bg,s,FFFF00&chl=%0D%0A4x_0%5CDelta%28x%29%2B3%5CDelta%28x%29%2B2%5CDelta%28x%5E2%29%3E0%0D%0A
or chart.apis.google with background color transparent and resized
For better readability URL needs to be decoded.
https://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=tx&chs=428x35&chf=bg,s,FFFFFF00&chl=
4x_0\Delta(x)+3\Delta(x)+2\Delta(x^2)>0
Data structure looks like this
{
"cht":"tx",
"chs":"428x35",
"chf":"bg,s,FFFFFF00",
"chl":"n4x_0\Delta(x) 3\Delta(x) 2\Delta(x^2)>0"
}
https://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=tx&chs=428x35&chf=bg,s,FFFFFF00&chl=%0D%0A4x_0%5CDelta%28x%29%2B3%5CDelta%28x%29%2B2%5CDelta%28x%5E2%29%3E0%0D%0A
You could try the Online image generator for mathematical formulas for a start.
mathurl is a mathematical version of TinyURL.com. It allows you to reference LaTeXed mathematical expressions using a short url. For example, http://mathurl.com/?5v4pjw will show [LaTeX output Image] which you can then edit. More details on mathurl’s help page
I just ran across MathJax on Ajaxian [via Wayback Machine]:
MathJax seems to have a chance at being a practical solution that offers a high quality display of LaTeX and MathML math notation in HTML pages.
The output is remarkably beautiful, and it's all pure HTML and CSS, which makes it scalable and selectable. Performance is currently a bit sluggish, but this is recognized.
As everyone has said, there are many services that do this already. Here is another easy one that I've used a number of times (and you can install it locally on your server if necessary):
http://www.codecogs.com/components/equationeditor/equationeditor.php
I'd take a good look at how the MediaWiki LaTeX support does it and borrow from there.
Please check out this site for a way to create TeX documents without any software installed. You can then snippet the result image with any screen capture method and embed the resulting image into a any website.
Go to http://sharelatex.com
The software is free to use, but you need to register to create documents.