I have a weird problem with images in visual web developer,
I cant change my images properties from properties panel (my changes don't take effect) and all images in my website have gotten the same size
when I resize one image (by dragging the border), all images get that new size?
any idea?
Somehow visual web developer read the image class in the CSS file instead of the properties of the control because there is something like this in my CSS file:
img {
width:260px;
}
Yes, basically the width and height properties of the HTML <img /> have been deprecated for some time, you are recommended to use styles instead.
VS then takes this to the extreme, and instead of using inline styles, will create a new style in the default style sheet location for img, as you've discovered.
However, unless you are using the image full size somewhere you are better off resizing the image before you upload it to the server, saving on everyones bandwidth.
Also, IE does pretty poor things with it's default scaling routine, but you can turn on cubic sampling through css.
Related
How can I add some external (or in any other way) CSS to PowerBI report embedded in Angular application as iframe? I need to remove the scrollbar from it, so I need to add this, so that the report fits better inside the iframe of the angular page:
.explorationContainer .exploreCanvas .canvasFlexBox {
height: inherit !important;
}
for the love of me, I couldn't find a way to insert it. I tried putting it in styles.scss of the angular app, but no go.
I don't think you can, and when I was implementing my solution I couldn't make anything work other than setting a fixed value to the height of the external container.
In the end what I did was to set the div height when loading the powerBI report, what I used on my solution was this (fills the height up to the bottom of the screen):
let yPosition = powerBIdiv.getBoundingClientRect().y;
powerBIdiv.style["height"] = `calc(100vh - ${yPosition}px)`;
TL;DR: Is it possible to load other images based on media-query from svg included via img tag?
I generate a bunch of svg files with have tables with text and icons inside. A PDF would be semantically a better container, but I need to keep such "documents" as images for seamless embed/preview and it probably won't solve my problem. So the story is about icons.
I wrote inline styles with media queries picking icons corresponding to user's screen DPI. Icons are already bundled into sprites, so I use pattern/image[xlink:href] + fill:url(#id). Everything works as needed when I embed svg directly into HTML (DOM islands). But if I embed svg via img tag (i.e. <img src="foo.svg">), it doesn't load icons at all, let alone showing them.
I understand, that I can embed icons via data-URL, but embedding icons for all supported screen dpis seems too much. The irony is that icons are raster ones, hardly vectorizable pixel-art, so I cannot have one set of icons for all DPIs.
Is there a way to have proper icons picked by media query w/o embedding them all?
You can't load external files from an SVG used in an <img> tag (or used in other "image" contexts, like CSS background images). For security and performance reasons, SVG used as image has to behave like any other image -- a single file, no secondary resources and no scripts.
If you don't want to use inline SVG, you might consider embedding an SVG file with an <object> tag or <iframe>. However, I recommend that you actually test carefully to see whether browsers are downloading the image files even if they aren't using them because of CSS.
So since it's not possible to load conditionally: either embed or not, I should do some clever detection about raster sets. Technically not a direct answer, but in case someone needs.
I decided to go with cookies. People visit normally the same site that hosts those SVG.
I'd set a cookie for their DPI and then all SVGs served would pick proper DPI images.
For people who haven't visited the site yet, I'd go with UA sniffing: mobiles and macs get 2x, others 1x. Or just 1x for everyone.
For my website we use custom style sheets that are stored locally on our server and are injected into the webpages. However when i add them to CKEditor and then attempt to resize or move an image with the enhanced image plugin they cannot be resized or moved at all. Has anyone encountered this problem before? Is there anyway around it?
edit: So i add my css files using
config.contentsCss = ['http://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Droid+Sans',
'http://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Bree+Serif',
'http://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Droid+Sans+Mono',
'http://192.168.0.50/css/new/all.css?v=1" media="all',
'http://192.168.0.50/css/new/templates.css?v=1',
'http://192.168.0.50/css/pre_review/colors.css?v=1',
'http://192.168.0.50/css/pre_review/paged_test.css?v=2',
'http://192.168.0.50/css/pre_review/bootstrap.min.css?v=1',
'http://192.168.0.50/css/pre_review/main.css?v=1',
'text/css'];
I have also installed the Enhanced Image plugin to allow me to resize and move images around. however when i insert an image on to the page the source looks like
<p><img alt="" height="239" src="http://icons.iconarchive.com/icons/yellowicon/game-stars/256/Mario-icon.png" width="239" /></p>
when i originally set the image width and height in the popup panel i set the values to 2 and 2, these values do nothing to edit the actual size of the image. It still displays at the full size of 239x 239.
I know that it is my added styles that are causing this error as it works fine without them, However i do need them. is there anyway around this without having to remove the styles?
First of all, your contentsCss has some weird parts like the last item or this 'http://192.168.0.50/css/new/all.css?v=1" media="all'. Please verify that all this works. Incorrect rules may affect CKEditor.
Second, the issue may be very simple - your CSS most likely affect widgets styling. Disable loading your CSS files one by one and see which one breaks the Enhanced Image plugin. Then find the rule that breaks it and then improve the rule so it does not affect images.
I am a newby to design and looking now into the use of background instead of foreground images, which is a common practice.
I look at the techniques used, and see that:
you usually need to explicitly state the dimensions of the image (and set the foreground element to these dimensions)
you need to make the foreground element to somehow disappear with css tricks.
All this looks really hackish. So, I wonder, why on earth do all this instead of just using the native element? I am sure there is a good answer
(I did go through this When to use IMG vs. CSS background-image? , and could not figure out a clear answer)
One thing to consider as a benefit to using CSS for images is that you can load all your design images (images for UI elements, etc) with one http request rather than an http request for each individual image using a sprite. One large image that contains a grid of all your images.
As its been stated before, content images should use the img tag which also helps for people using various accessibility options when visiting your site/app. For example, if they are using a screenreader, the screenreader knows its an image and can read the img alt name or title, but if its just a div with a background image they get nothing.
The main difference is that in the img tag the image is hardcoded.
With CSS you can create different designs, switch between them, redesign the page, without altering the source code. To see the power of CSS, check http://www.csszengarden.com/, all the pages use the same HTML source, but with different CSS layout.
As #Shmiddty noted, if img is for embedded images (actual content, for example a gallery, or a picture for an article), and CSS is for design.
Also, the question you referred to, has nice list of all the use-cases: When to use CSS background-image.
The goal is to separate content from presentation. HTML should contain just content, and all presentation should be moved to the CSS. Once you achieve that, you gain a few useful side effects:
The CSS (presentational code) is cached by the user's browser, and each HTML file requested is smaller. This also has some SEO benefits (decreased code fluff).
Screen readers have to muddle through less when interpreting your page for visually impaired users. Making sure your HTML contains just content means visually impaired users reach what they're looking for much quicker.
CSS makes it possible to display the same content in different visual configurations, which is the cornerstone of the responsive web design movement. Properly delineating your content and presentation means being able to use the same HTML files across multiple platforms (desktop, tablet, smartphone).
However, there are times when images are content on a specific page. In those cases, you want to use an IMG tag, and moving the image to the CSS is actually a wrong move. A great discussion of when and where to use text to image replacement is at When to use IMG vs. CSS background-image? Basically, my personal litmus test is something like: Is this image going to be used multiple times on the site? If it is, it's probably part of the design. Once-off images are generally content.
If you're looking to move your design images to the CSS, congratulations :-p You've adopted a healthy amount of work, but started doing something worthwhile to the long-term health of your website as part of the web ecosystem. I would highly recommend looking into using the SASS/Compass system to manage your design images as sprites (see A List Apart:CSS Sprites and Spriting with Compass).
One of the main points of image replacement is to use your site title in a h1 tag for good SEO, and then hiding the text and replacing it with a custom logo.
This also makes your site more accessible. Say for example, your user has CSS disabled for whatever reason (screenreaders, maybe). They would still see the textual representation of your site title, whereas normal users would see the custom graphic.
I've observed that often the websites use only one background image which contains multiple images on it. For example, instead of using separately icons, all of the icons are put on one image and then the different parts of image are used in different section.
Is there any advantage to this?
How can this be used?
For example, for the following Stack Overflow sprite, how would I display just one of the images?
The technique is called CSS Sprites. Basically you use CSS's background-position property and fixed height or width for your element.
If your elemnts are fixed width and fixed height at the same time you can freely create a more compact image. See this site for more complex examples.
You are talking about CSS sprites, in which the background position changes on hover. Learn more here:
http://css-tricks.com/css-sprites/
Change the css property background-position.
yes , using sprites is good for website performs because every single component on website send different http request .So, when we use sprites images the http request become less & website performance increase.That rule is also apply on css also less css files less http request. you can yourself with the help of safari web inspector.
for more better performance download "yslow"
And with CSS sprites is also possible to make e.g. menu button hover effect without waiting until second image loads. see
It has the advantage that only one image needs to be loaded so that things like hover (roll-over) effects are faster. The technique is usually called "CSS sprites". Google for it.
It has been common for a while to put two images on one sprite sheet, but the tendency has been moving towards combining ALL of your background images on the same sprite sheet to load just one file for all of them. There's a rather good tutorial here.