does anyone know if there exists any offline software or plugin(dreamweaver, etc) to generate a css sprite. That is: merging images and generating the css rules.
I know there is a post here: Tools to make CSS sprites?
but all of those are online generation tools.
There is a pure ruby library to generate css sprites. that means no dependancy on rmagic or other libraries.
http://github.com/aberant/spittle
I have created a Ruby library that can generate sprite images and CSS rules, which I have not fully published yet (I'm wanting to Add more features, such as CSS rewriting, so I'm waiting).
Not wanting to spam, add a comment and I'll send you the link.
As for dreamweaver plugins or desktop applications, none I am aware of.
Related
I am using libHaru (by including the source in my C++ code) to generate PDF files. I am hoping to make these PDF files accessible by adding "tags" (aka "structure tags"). From what I can see in the documentation and source code, libHaru does not support this. Can someone confirm that libHaru indeed does not support tags? And if it's not supported directly, I wonder if there is a way to add tags by modifying the libHaru code? Has anybody done this?
I looked through the 22 page manual for libHaru, and there was no mention of tags, so I think it's safe to assume that it doesn't support tagging.
Attempting to make any library tag PDFs (and do it well) would be a non-trivial task. You'd essentially be re-inventing the wheel. Consider the fact that Adobe Acrobat Pro is only just mediocre at tagging PDFs and requires a ton of human intervention to get it right.
There is a product called CommonLook Dynamic that is made for creating accessible PDFs from live data on a webserver, but I can't vouch for it myself. I have used other products from this company, and they've been very good, but they're not at all cheap.
Generally speaking, PDF tagging is often a very complex thing. To make it work with an automated algorithm, the source code formatting has to be perfectly formed and dead simple. If your source material is at all complex or malformed, it won't come out right.
As an example, it's not possible for PDF generation software to do a good job at things like crafting good alt text for images, creating useful PDF metadata, or tagging complex tables. These are things that require human intervention.
It's very slick and cross browser/platform at the click of a button, which is leading non-technical types to conclude the entire engine is intrinsically better than what we use now. Is it simply that they've taken the time to implement all the per-browser/OS plugin versions of Unity WebPlayer and polish it, or is there anything deeper in the way the engine architecture is set up?
Unity takes scripts written in C#, UnityScript (based on JavaScript), or Boo (based on Python), and compiles them into mono assemblies. Those assemblies + the 3d models, sounds, and textures required by your game are compressed into a .unity3d file that is loaded by their browser plugin. Since almost all of the game's logic is in managed mono assemblies it runs cross platform with very few platform specific quirks.
They've recently rewritten their plugin detection and installation code so that it is very easy to drop a block of javascript into a web page that shows Unity content if the user has the plugin, or other content (image, flash, video) if they don't. I believe their plugin supports all A-class browsers on Mac and Windows, and the plugin can be installed without restarting the browser.
One advantage of the Unity engine is that you can take a lot of off-the-shelf managed assemblies and include them in your project and call them from Unity code. But you have to be aware that these assemblies can really bloat the size of the .unity3d file.
Another advantage is that you can easily write components that expose tunable parameters that can be modified by non-technical people.
And yet another advantage is that a well written project can be ported to/from iPhone, Standalone, Android, Web, etc. in under a day. I've personally done iPhone to Web by just modifying my input handler and changing texture compression.
One big disadvantage is that since the application is running managed code it is not too difficult for a curious or malicious person to decompile the assemblies into completely readable code. So you need to think about what someone could do with that info (cheat in multiplayer, write bots, falsify high scores, etc.). It is possible to obfuscate your assemblies, but it isn't trivial to add this step to your build process.
I'm looking for some static library or open source project (in obj-c, released under some permissive license) to parse CSS in iPhone. Any recommendations?
OK, I found good library for parsing CSS - libCSS from the NetSurf web browser project. Released under MIT license, can be used without problems for commercial iPhone applications distributed via the AppStore.
It requires some code for the programmer to write (e.g. you need to provide your own DOM hierarchy handlers), and there are no examples available... but people from the NetSurf dev mailing lists are very helpful. In case of problems you can search the list for my questions.
libCSS
NetSurf dev mailing list
I would recommend htmlcxx. It's pretty actively maintained, written in C++ and you can use it to parse HTML and CSS.
Of course, since it's written in C++, you can use it in your iPhone application with no problems at all.
I've taken this project and made it easy to add to your iOS or OSX projects. Clone my github project and add the html (and or css) folder to your project. There is an Xcode project too - so you can build and run the simple test provided by the original authors
I looked on CKEditor's website and I noticed that there's no plugins documentation yet.
But I'm wondering if there is any anywhere else?
I'd like to make a little plugin to add youtube video from CKEditor. Pretty simple plugin but still I'd like to know how to make it.
Documentation is sparse at the moment, but not completely non-existent.
Check out my CKEDitor link survival pack from a previous question.
As a starting point, you may want to copy and use one of the existing plugins (the unpacked ones from the _source directory, of course).
The symbols plugin is extremely simple but shows the basic points of inserting HTML into the editor
The links plugin may be a good starting point for how to add input fields, tabs, and make them interact (If you want to go the road of understanding CKEditor's highly sophisticated dialog layout system, that is. My cup of tea, it wasn't. You may want to just set up an Iframe dialog, and do everything by yourself).
Since this question was first posted, CK has added documentation for creating plugins - http://docs.cksource.com/CKEditor_3.x/Tutorials/Abbr_Plugin_Part_1
Are Adobe's plugin architectures for Photoshop and Lightroom related in any way? If I have source code for a plugin, that works with PS 3.0-CS3 as well as PS Elements 6.0 can I use it with Lightroom directly? If not, what would I have to modify?
No.. lightroom plugins are written in the scripting language lua, photoshop plugins are written in C++.
As noted by kasperjj, the Lightroom plugins are written in Lua so there is not a direct way to convert something from Photoshop over to Lightroom. Additionally, as per the Adobe Lightroom Developer Center, the only features that are extendable in the current SDK are the export functionality, metadata, and web engine functionality.
As pointed out by Rob, the Lightroom SDK does not expose any interface that allows manipulations of the image files themselves. Partly this is because Lightroom is a non-destructive editor. None of the edits made in its Develop module are applied to the original image file; they are applied to the file generated when the image is exported, printed, or used in a web gallery.
That said, there are examples of export plugins that manipulate the image after Lightroom has finished applying its adjustments. In principle, it would be possible to create a host application that loaded a Photoshop plugin and applied it during Lightroom export. It might even be possible to use Photoshop itself as that host application...