Whether there is a standard for location of rss in website?
like this :
http://MyWebSite.com/rss.xml
There's no standard URL—any browser that supports RSS is going to do so by looking at the “alternate” link you specify in your page's header. For this page, for instance, it's
<link rel="alternate" type="application/atom+xml" title="Feed for question 'what is the best link for rss?'" href="/feeds/question/5004140"/>
The “href” attribute is arbitrary. Point it wherever you like.
If there is, I certainly have never come across it - and I have a whole slew of blogs in my RSS reader. Better to use a <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" href="" /> in your <head>.
Related
After a deep search, there is something to be known by me which puts me to think a lot and couldn't get the idea of the purpose that it serves. Which is capitalizing the S in stylesheet for rel attribute value.
what is the difference between,
<link rel="stylesheet" href="/css/widgets/some.css">
and
<link rel="Stylesheet" href="/css/widgets/some.css">
what purpose does it serves? An on-shore 15years experienced web application head is insisting to do this. Please explain and make me understand.
There is no difference, as link types are case insensitive. I am guessing that your colleague prefers them that way for some reason.
Please provide the Best and Fastest way to edit the CSS in JSP pages. I am presently trying to use brackets software but getting issue.
Thank you for your support in advance.
Regards,
Lakshman E
My personal preferences are not to mix different technologies.
Each should be stored in its own file(s): css, js
Then use
<link rel="stylesheet" href="stylesheet.css">
<script src="myscripts.js"></script>
to include them in jsp/html.
I have installed Joomla 3.x and some modules.
One of my modules is to display articles from certain categories of my articles, but when I navigate to my article, the CSS stylesheets do not load.
When I view the source, I discovered that the URL for the CSS stylesheet in the page above becomes:
<base href="http://cambridge.mywebcommunity.org/index.php/10-%E7%88%B1%E7%AB%8B%E6%96%B9%E5%8A%A8%E5%90%91%E6%9B%B4%E6%96%B0/3-welcome-to-your-blog" />
... instead of the original I put in, here:
<base href="http://cambridge.mywebcommunity.org/" />
This also happens to another CSS stylesheet from the module. The CSS URL loads like this:
<link rel="stylesheet" href="http://cambridge.mywebcommunity.org/10-爱立方动向更新/modules/mod_news_pro_gk5/interface/css/style.css" type="text/css" />
... instead of the original CSS URL that I put in:
<link rel="stylesheet" href="http://cambridge.mywebcommunity.org/modules/mod_news_pro_gk5/interface/css/style.css" type="text/css" />
So I have figured out that the issue is the URLs are not being added by Joomla correctly. How would I go about fixing this?
From what you've posted it looks like you (or extension developers) are trying to add css with absolute links. Looking at the source of your page will quickly show you that your links look different from the core links in that they are absolute not relative. You may need to look a the code in the modules doing this and fix or contact the developers and ask them to fix. Also ask them about the js.
In Joomla you add style sheets with code like this in your template index:
$doc->addStyleSheet('templates/'.$this->template.'/css/template.css');
The change in behavior is most likely due to a recent security fix concerning uris in the header. I'm not going to link to details of the exploit but easy enough to find out why this was changed, but it was for good reasons.
I have a page that has translations available in a variety of languages. I'm trying to be a good HTTP citizen:
I return the correct version based on the Accept-Language header
I return a Vary: Accept-Language header
(The users of my site can override these settings in their user profiles, but I don't think that's relevant to the discussion at hand.)
How do I get search engines to index all the variants?
Later
The Google Webmaster Central Blog recommends using URLs and against using Accept-Language to detect language. Their solution would certainly work, but it seems anti-HTTP.
It is highly recommended to use different domains for different languages:
fr.mysite.com or mysite.fr for French
ru.mysite.com or mysite.ru for Russian
A less preferred method that would still work for SEO is to use sub-directories to differentiate:
www.mysite.com/fr/ for French
www.mysite.com/ru/ for Russian
Sometimes session is used to identify the language being served. This is not recommended for SEO - search engines will not see different languages.
References:
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=182192
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/seo-guide-international-versions-of-websites
The best way is to use the "Canonical Tag" and the "Alternate Tag". Thats what a SEO would say. What they mean by this is
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.yourdomain.com" />
<link rel="alternate" hreflang="de" href="http://de.yourdomain.com" />
<link rel="alternate" hreflang="en" href="http://en.yourdomain.com" />
If you like more, you can also use other toplevel domains like this
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.yourdomain.com" />
<link rel="alternate" hreflang="de" href="http://www.german-keyword.de" />
<link rel="alternate" hreflang="en" href="http://www.yourdomain.com" />
Put this tags in the head of every version of your website!
Here is how it works:
Canonical tells google to use all incoming linkjuice on this page to "this specific canonical url". This includes duplicate content pages, which may exist trough struggling with GET parameters! This will drop all your duplicate content worries.
Then, see trough the "Alternate Tag" which version is good for which language and show this specific url (eg. de.yourdomain.com) in the countries SERPs.
Here a the two common sources on this topic:
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=de&answer=139394
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=189077
as I strive to come up with the best methods name in my designs I struggle on a simple question but still very confusing to me.
There are two ways I use for retrieving stylesheets or javascript files:
<link href="/myProject/public/styles/master.min.css?v=1274382274" media="screen" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />
<link href="http://mydomain.com/public/styles/master.min.css?v=1274382274" media="screen" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />
<script type="text/javascript" src="/myProject/public/scripts/master.min.js?v=1274394222"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://mydomain.com/public/scripts/master.min.js?v=1274394222"></script>
I know that http://[...] can be called as an URI (as specified by the difference between URI and URL)
but an href or src that specifies a path according to the document root of the server such as /myProject/public is different.
So what would be the best term when speaking of those two different href|src value's?
/myProject/public/[...]
http://mydomain.com/[...]
An URI since it specifies a location and an identification?
An URL? Not sure why
A path? A definitive no IMO
Another term, please specify and explain
My design is independant of both the href and src, otherwise I would just have used the two terms href and src, of course. So in summary, I need the term that specifies the above while speaking about both about the href and src.
Thanks!
I believe the linked question perfectly answers your question. Nothing more to say. All URLs are URIs but not vice versa. Both of the examples you wrote all URLs (and consequently URIs too). The first is a relative URL and the second is an absolute URL. Both are URLs as they locate a resource. URNs are, for instance, URIs but not URLs. They identify a resource but provide no means to locate it.
What is hidden by a definitional approach (i.e. "every A is B") is that the "URI vs URL issue" is indeed historical.
The term "URL" was used in specifications only for a few years. However this was exactly the years where the Web became popular. So everybody learnt about "URLs", "sites", "pages", "addresses", and even if the W3C strived for erasing these questionable terms and concepts from people minds, the harm was done.