Is there a functionality of .setWebviewClient without using webviews? Possibly through a view instead. I am trying to mimic a webview without using the functions. I have to use Chrome Custom Tabs and it seems to not have the same types of built in functions.
Thank you in advance.
Chrome Custom Tabs do not have the exact same functionality or API as webviews. They're better suited for serving third-party content whilst webviews are better suited for first-party content.
All of this means you can't achieve your goal using CCT.
Related
In vscode there is a smiley face at the bottom right side of the page.
Does anyone know if there are docs relating to how to develop an extension with a Form-like UI Such as this.
https://www.screencast.com/t/rgIwIO1pVQvv
That is built-in UI. We don't expose it to extensions.
I suggest trying to use existing API functions such as as showQuickPick and showInputBox if you can. If you really need custom UI, take a look at html previews
I developed GWT desktop browser application , before working on porting the Application for webkit browsers I need to have following doubts clarified:
Is it possible to map mulitple UiBinder template with the same View class?
Are the widgets consistent in look and feel for Desktop as well as webkit(mobile) browsers?
Thanking in advance.
Take a look at the mobilewebapp example which comes with the GWT SDK. There you can see, how an app can serve different views depending on the device by using deferred binding.
Using the first approach, you have different views for each device. So, you are free to choose different widgets for different platforms.
I want to share one the method that I tried, First of all instead of mapping view to viewimpl you can bind it to viewprovider, and then based on user-agent values you can return the appropriate instance to bind to.I implemented this in sample application and its working fine as of now.
I have a UIWebView into a mobile website that I run, and would like to hide some links when it's seen by the WebView--but not mobile Safari. It seems like there's several approaches to this:
Evaluate custom Javascript to hide elements of a certain class.
Pass in a GET parameter so that the server does it.
Pass in a custom header so that the server does it.
Maybe something else...
To me it seems like they all have their tradeoffs. What's the best way of doing it?
If you want to do this, I'd say detecting the UA with JavaScript is probably the way to go because it will be added automatically, and you can concentrate on the website, rather than having to add code to both.
Also, you don't have to check every time a link is clicked to add a custom header or GET parameter.
What I do to make the distinction between UIWebview and mobile Safari is using the userAgent (a custom one for the webView). Based on the UserAgent I display different content for each "platform"
I need to create an interactive Facebook Tab for a client, similar to this:
http://www.facebook.com/#!/knnktr.
The application has a number of slides, which are basically images that will scroll left/right as the visitor clicks on two arrows on either side of the displayed image.
I could do this in Flash, but I could also attempt doing this with JavaScript.
Now, I understand that Facebook's APIs often change, and iframe's are currently not an option.
What is the best/correct way to achieve this. Should I stick with the Static FBML? If we have an option to use JavaScript, we'll prefer that above Flash. The question is, does the Static FBML limit the ability to perform some JavaScript calls.
I need to respond to mouse clicks, and I also need to be able to make remote AJAX requests to our server.
If you're building a tab, FBML/FBJS are your only option. The official FB docs for FBJS are pretty good: http://developers.facebook.com/docs/fbjs/
A couple caveats about FBJS:
They rewrite your Javascript to only allow limited functionality. If you're used to a nice Javascript lib like jQuery you're out of luck.
You can't use external js includes, the Javascript must be in the same page
Take a look at the event, animate and AJAX sections in the docs. Taking a quick look at your example I don't see anything you couldn't do with FBJS.
I am making an app in GWT. It is like a dashboard and will have out of the widgets.
Now when we ship this out, there is a use case that the customer might want to create their own GWT widget and use this in the dashboard app.
As I understand it, they will not be able to do this since we cannot ship our source code which is needed to compile the whole app again once tag of their widget/module gets into the gwt.xml file of my app.
I cannot use anything other that GWT to make this dashboard. And their widget could be say a flash heapmap, a jquery widget/plugin, another GWT module, a jsp page that renders a visualization from back end.
So far my thoughts have been to provide a widget in my app which is a wrapper in the form of an Iframe and call their main page (they will provide url), and have an api to let my app and their widget talk.
But I would like to know if there are other / better approaches?
This is exactly the problem solved by google's OpenSocial widgets. There are a few opensource implementations: http://shindig.apache.org/ is one. You can look into integrating that in to your app. An added bonus is that you can then display widgets from other applications (such as atlassian jira) that also serve opensocial widgets.
Depending on how closed source your application is (can custom JS/HTML be added to pages?), you could always provide a native Javascript (JSNI) API for some custom dashboard widgets. The simplest solution I'm thinking of would be a JSNI method which your customers could call to set the HTML content of said widget. This method would allow them to use a variety of options such as JQuery widgets, their own GWT widget generated HTML or even an IFrame pointing to their JSP pages etc... You could then provide additional JSNI API methods which would allow them to interact with your app/widget in other ways as well. This would be better than the IFrame method because you wouldn't have to deal with cross domain scripting security issues.