Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
On the latest update of UCBrowser ( V11.0.0.828 ) android lots of annoying news feeds are there. Is there any way to disable it?
Seems in the latest update (V11.0.8.885) UC browser is allowing users to disable UC NEWS.
Settings -> Homepage Settings -> UC News Display (On/ Off)
:)
in home page scroll down to the end. click manage cards unchecked all.
Open your UC Browser then just scroll down after doing that there is a plus sign button at top right side click on that and tap on edit and then select which type of news you want whatever you dont want then tap on × button then click on done.But there is no option to remove recommend from uc news feeds.
Go to home page setting and uc news display change to card now restart automatically now go uc news manage cards turn of all news that time do not use mobile data.
Sometimes uc news install s automatically then disconnect data and disable all unknown application... Even fake WhatsApp a application will also be installed which re installs uc news ..then restart phone check for running application if any thing runs disable it.. clear all cache data of disable apps.
Related
Closed. This question needs debugging details. It is not currently accepting answers.
Edit the question to include desired behavior, a specific problem or error, and the shortest code necessary to reproduce the problem. This will help others answer the question.
Closed 5 months ago.
Improve this question
I have activated the apps 'My Work Queue and Assign Work', and when i click on the apps i got the error "Target was not found"
(adding element with duplicate id)
I have activated the ICF nodes and the ODATA services as well as the role assignment. I have succesfully implemented the other applications but only those 2 are not working.
Could anyone help me fix this problem ?
Best regards
This is a coding issue in the frontend application. Create a support incident (Cf. SAP KBA 1296527). The support component should be PP-PEO-SFE according to "My Work Queue" reference page.
In chrome, open your development tool and see in console and network tab is there is any dependent backend service which is required to enable along with them.
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 5 months ago.
Improve this question
At present,97 URLs are affected by CLS issue more than 0.25 (desktop) and
85 URLs affected by LCP issue: longer than 4s (mobile) on our website.
Website - www.sopact.com to look into it.
How can we fix these issues?
Thank you in advance.
Run some of the affected pages in Page Speed Insights. Select desktop as that is your biggest problem area. The tool has a "Show audits relevant to" option where you can select CLS. The report will then show only issues related to causing Layout Shifts on desktop devices.
Expand each issue to get more details on what is causing the issue and sometimes what to do to fix it.
If you want to dig deeper the Chrome browsers Performance tool can provide a lot of details. It also lets you throttle your browser so you can more easily see the layout shifts happening.
If you enable screenshots you can hover along the screenshot row to see how the page changes as it loads. Make sure you start hovering at the point the new page is loading as the initial part shows the previous page before it is replaced.
I have the feeling in your case you have elements that are off screen expanding your main div as they load, and causing it to shift. The Page Speed Insights lists some element that could be adjusted so that they don't expand the div as the load. e.g. define their height in advance.
There is a page test tool which tells you more about your CLS rating:
https://www.webpagetest.org/
I am not sure if this tool is somehow related to Google, but in my case it outputs the same CLS rating.
If you have a close look you will recognize that this tool is not able to do parallel loading. And I assume this is same for the module which Search Console uses. Real world browsers load files in parallel which shortens loading times drastically. This one does not - so you get loading times of several seconds for bigger pages. Well, fonts are loaded after CSS and images. In my case the delayed loading of fonts (several seconds later) caused the problem.
To improve the loading time in a sequential environment you can use certain preload technologies.
<link rel="preload" href="/fonts/anyfont.woff2" as="font" crossorigin />
The tag above will advice the browser (and Google's tool) to load the font upfront. When it is loaded in your CSS later, it will already be available in the cache.
Closed. This question is not reproducible or was caused by typos. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question was caused by a typo or a problem that can no longer be reproduced. While similar questions may be on-topic here, this one was resolved in a way less likely to help future readers.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I am trying to submit my first app for iOS 8 and i am going through the new procedure of Apple's iTunes connect. I have upload my binary, fill all the details and upload all screenshots. Then i press submit for review and I see this screen with 2 option. Whatever I select the "submit" button stays greyed out.
Apple made a HTML coding mistake on this page. Specifically they forgot a quote on one of the tags making the HTML invalid. Using FireFox you can change the HTML and then the submit works. I submitted my app this way just now and it is "Waiting for Review"!
On the Export Compliance Tag they are missing a quote (") after the "section" in a tag. If you add that (") in the Inspector on FireFox (or using similar methods on other browsers to modify the HTML you are looking at) the Export Compliance question will show up and then you can answer it and submit your app.
OR you could just wait till tomorrow and Apple will probably fix their HTML coding mistake.
Removed just one "ng-hide" tag to enable third question about Export Compliance and the button submit appeared.
Finally I got the solution for this.
Last night also I tried to upload the build on App Store. I left the window idle for 2 hours after uploading the build and the button appeared. Seems to be a bug or feature in the new upload system.
Are you trying this through Chrome? Try Safari and you should get three options and the submit button will be available when all three are checked
It's and interface bug by Apple. (Wow, Apple) I cannot reach the page again so I can only give so much detail on how I could get through it and submit: I opened up Chrome inspector on the page to look at the HTML, looked for the "cryptography" string as the mistakenly hidden question is about that. I removed the "ng-hide" class off of some of the tags, and finally the crytography question appeared. (Along with the "Is your app going to be sold in the French App Store?" question for some reason.) I checked no, and the submit button was enabled.
We may have caught Apple in a middle of a deployment. It looks like they added a new question to this page for "Export Compliance". Either way, it looks like they fixed the submit button now.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
Can anybody help me that how can i set PRINT and save as PDF icon(functionality) in TYPO3 pages ?
Thanks...in advance..
There are many examples in Google and I think that you should browse them, to find the one the best fits your needs.
In general 'historically' print version was suggested to be build with new PAGE cObject which typeNum is set to 98 (of course that's only suggestion) in general going this clue, you should find many examples and other resources by searching in Google for typo3 typeNum 98.
When you'll create alternative PAGE object (and maybe also use modified template for it) you need also add on your webpage a link which be the same as the current URL but with additional param &type=98, when user will click it TYPO3 will open the alternative version of the page. So you can add to this a JS in header which will also start system's print dialog.
You can also search the extensions repository and find something for placing the print button if you are unfamiliar with TypoScript.
PDF rendering is similar from point of view of the frontend, however most probably you need to use some additional lib, so it will be best to search for ready to use solution from the repo.
In general PDF version could be tricky, therefore from my experience I can say that nowadays it's sometimes better to avoid the PDF icon at all or use linking to some external service. Of course all depends on your needs. Remember that there are many programs which are able to create PDF's so if it is not required maybe it's no worth of its effort.
Finally take a look at the AddThis widget it can be also used for easy adding of icons for printing and online PDF creation, additionally you can also send invitations via e-mail, or even share the link on the hundreds social portals. And what's most important installing this is just like adding view lines of HTML code vie TypoScript.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm just looking through some of the webmaster stats that Google provides, and noticed that the most common links to our website are to some research articles that we've put up in PDF format. The articles are also available on the site in HTML.
I was looking at the sites (mostly forums and blogs) which link to these articles and was thinking that none of the people clicking the links would actually get to see our website, and that we're giving something away for free and not even getting some page views in return.
I thought that maybe I could change my server settings to redirect external requests to these files to the HTML version. This way, the users still get the same content (albeit in an unexpected format), and we'd get these people to see our website and hopefully explore it some more. Requests coming from my site should be let through to the PDF. Though I don't know how to set this up just yet (keep an eye out for a follow-up question here), I'm sure this is technically possible. The only question is: is that a good idea?
What would you consider the downsides of redirecting traffic from external sources such that they see our site, not just get our content? Do they outweigh the benefits?
The only other alternate option I can see is to make our branding and URL much more visible in the PDF files themselves. Any thoughts?
Hopefully your PDFs are equally branded so that visitors will feel compelled to search further in your website. That might be just as important as having visitors briefly stop-over at your website.
I'm usually opposed to all such redirects as harmful to usability. However, in this case a basic content-type negotiation takes place and this might be acceptable. However, make sure that this doesn't break downloads of the PDF documents for users who might have disabled their referers in the browser (I do this, for one).
Sure you could cut them off, but there is a bigger issue at play: Why aren't these people finding you before they are finding these moocher sites?
Possible reasons are:
a) they did find your site, but not the content they were looking for, even though its obviously there, or
b) your site never appeared in their search results.
You may want to consider a site redesign in order to address those concerns before cutting off what appears to be a reliable source of information about your target audience (for you and the people who get your PDFs from elsewhere).
In the meantime, I would suggest you allow the traffic, add a cover page to all of your PDFs that are basically a full-page ad for your site and then enlarge the font on the copyright section of each page so the authorship is very prominent. You have a built in audience now, they just don't know it yet. Show them where the source is.
Eventually, the traffic will come to you and know you as a reliable source for that information.
I would do it. It's your site and your data.
The hot-linkers are essentially 'guests' and you can make the rules for your guests.
If they don't like it, they don't have to link.
I would add a page at the beginning of each article with info about the website, the current article and links to other articles on your website.
I find it more convenient than redirecting the user to a page on your website(that's annoying). Most people right click and download PDF files, what would that do when your redirect ;)
I think the proper thing to do in this situation is to leave the redirects. Here's why:
There's nothing worse than expecting to go somewhere/get something and not getting it (the negative impact would outweigh the positive.)
Modify your content to add a footer such as: "like what you saw, we've got more, check us out at www.url.com"
If your content is good, users will check out your website. These are the visitors you want, they're more likely to stick around and provide your site with value (whatever that may be.) Those that you've coerced may provide you with an extra click or two, but you will likely not see any value given back to your site.
Look at other successful sites that give something away for free: Joel on Software, Seth Godin, Tim Ferriss, 37Signals. The long term will provide better, more consistent value than the short term.
If you go for this solution, see if redirecting to the HTML version also changes the file name displayed by the browser if somebody used 'save as' on the link, else an HTML page would be saved with a pdf extension. Apart from that, I can see no reason why you shouldn't do it.
As an alternative, see if you can add a link to your site to the top of the pdf file. This way they are reminded where it comes from even if someone else sent it to them by email.