news
Open Standards, Microblogging Protocols Update, and More
-
Manuel Moreale ☛ On open protocols
If someone wants to build a service, on top of AP, that only displays content of a certain type, they should be able to do so. Granted, they should make it very clear to the people who sign up for it that some filtering is happening, but if those same people are cool with that, then I don’t see the issue.
-
Nate ☛ This is Fine: an Interim Microblogging Protocols Update
It’s been a little over a year since I made my updated microblogging protocols comparison. Since then a few things have happened, and my previous could use some trimming. In the spirit of keeping things shorter (and keeping the comparison v3 post relevant longer), I figured I’d split the post into two parts: this one, which includes random updates and things that happened over the last year or so - and a second one, “Microblogging Protocols Compared v3” which will be a more streamlined protocol comparison. Anyway, as you can probably tell by the meme, the microblogging protocols have been going through a rough patch lately - though it’s not all bad news.
-
Markup from Hell ☛ What's wrong with this HTML, and is it valid?
What's wrong with it?
Everything? I mean, this HTML looks like it was written in 1998!
-
Alex Chan ☛ When square pixels aren’t square
If I also set a width or a height, the browser now knows exactly how much space this video will take up on the page – even if it hasn’t loaded the video file yet. When it initially renders the page, it can leave the right gap, so it doesn’t need to rearrange when the video eventually loads. (The technical term is “reducing cumulative layout shift”.)
That’s the idea, anyway.
I noticed that some of my videos weren’t fitting in their allocated boxes. When the video file loaded, it could be too small and get letterboxed, or be too big and force the page to rearrange to fit. Clearly there was a bug in my code for computing aspect ratios, but what?