Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (4027)

• The use cases for a element in HTML

  27 novembre 2012, par silvia

  The W3C HTML WG and the WHATWG are currently discussing the introduction of a <main> element into HTML.

  The <main> element has been proposed by Steve Faulkner and is specified in a draft extension spec which is about to be accepted as a FPWD (first public working draft) by the W3C HTML WG. This implies that the W3C HTML WG will be looking for implementations and for feedback by implementers on this spec.

  I am supportive of the introduction of a <main> element into HTML. However, I believe that the current spec and use case list don’t make a good enough case for its introduction. Here are my thoughts.

  Main use case : accessibility

  In my opinion, the main use case for the introduction of <main> is accessibility.

  Like any other users, when blind users want to perceive a Web page/application, they need to have a quick means of grasping the content of a page. Since they cannot visually scan the layout and thus determine where the main content is, they use accessibility technology (AT) to find what is known as “landmarks”.

  “Landmarks” tell the user what semantic content is on a page : a header (such as a banner), a search box, a navigation menu, some asides (also called complementary content), a footer, …. and the most important part : the main content of the page. It is this main content that a blind user most often wants to skip to directly.

  In the days of HTML4, a hidden “skip to content” link at the beginning of the Web page was used as a means to help blind users access the main content.

  In the days of ARIA, the aria @role=main enables authors to avoid a hidden link and instead mark the element where the main content begins to allow direct access to the main content. This attribute is supported by AT – in particular screen readers – by making it part of the landmarks that AT can directly skip to.

  Both the hidden link and the ARIA @role=main approaches are, however, band aids : they are being used by those of us that make “finished” Web pages accessible by adding specific extra markup.

  A world where ARIA is not necessary and where accessibility developers would be out of a job because the normal markup that everyone writes already creates accessible Web sites/applications would be much preferable over the current world of band-aids.

  Therefore, to me, the primary use case for a <main> element is to achieve exactly this better world and not require specialized markup to tell a user (or a tool) where the main content on a page starts.

  An immediate effect would be that pages that have a <main> element will expose a “main” landmark to blind and vision-impaired users that will enable them to directly access that main content on the page without having to wade through other text on the page. Without a <main> element, this functionality can currently only be provided using heuristics to skip other semantic and structural elements and is for this reason not typically implemented in AT.

  Other use cases

  The <main> element is a semantic element not unlike other new semantic elements such as <header>, <footer>, <aside>, <article>, <nav>, or <section>. Thus, it can also serve other uses where the main content on a Web page/Web application needs to be identified.

  Data mining

  For data mining of Web content, the identification of the main content is one of the key challenges. Many scholarly articles have been published on this topic. This stackoverflow article references and suggests a multitude of approaches, but the accepted answer says “there’s no way to do this that’s guaranteed to work”. This is because Web pages are inherently complex and many <div>, <p>, <iframe> and other elements are used to provide markup for styling, notifications, ads, analytics and other use cases that are necessary to make a Web page complete, but don’t contribute to what a user consumes as semantically rich content. A <main> element will allow authors to pro-actively direct data mining tools to the main content.

  Search engines

  One particularly important “data mining” tool are search engines. They, too, have a hard time to identify which sections of a Web page are more important than others and employ many heuristics to do so, see e.g. this ACM article. Yet, they still disappoint with poor results pointing to findings of keywords in little relevant sections of a page rather than ranking Web pages higher where the keywords turn up in the main content area. A <main> element would be able to help search engines give text in main content areas a higher weight and prefer them over other areas of the Web page. It would be able to rank different Web pages depending on where on the page the search words are found. The <main> element will be an additional hint that search engines will digest.

  Visual focus

  On small devices, the display of Web pages designed for Desktop often causes confusion as to where the main content can be found and read, in particular when the text ends up being too small to be readable. It would be nice if browsers on small devices had a functionality (maybe a default setting) where Web pages would start being displayed as zoomed in on the main content. This could alleviate some of the headaches of responsive Web design, where the recommendation is to show high priority content as the first content. Right now this problem is addressed through stylesheets that re-layout the page differently depending on device, but again this is a band-aid solution. Explicit semantic markup of the main content can solve this problem more elegantly.

  Styling

  Finally, naturally, <main> would also be used to style the main content differently from others. You can e.g. replace a semantically meaningless <div id=”main”> with a semantically meaningful <main> where their position is identical. My analysis below shows, that this is not always the case, since oftentimes <div id=”main”> is used to group everything together that is not the header – in particular where there are multiple columns. Thus, the ease of styling a <main> element is only a positive side effect and not actually a real use case. It does make it easier, however, to adapt the style of the main content e.g. with media queries.

  Proposed alternative solutions

  It has been proposed that existing markup serves to satisfy the use cases that <main> has been proposed for. Let’s analyse these on some of the most popular Web sites. First let’s list the propsed algorithms.

  Proposed solution No 1 : Scooby-Doo

  On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote :
  | The main content is whatever content isn’t
  | marked up as not being main content (anything not marked up with <header>,
  | <aside>, <nav>, etc).
  

  This implies that the first element that is not a <header>, <aside>, <nav>, or <footer> will be the element that we want to give to a blind user as the location where they should start reading. The algorithm is implemented in https://gist.github.com/4032962.

  Proposed solution No 2 : First article element

  On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote :
  | On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Ian Yang wrote :
  | >
  | > That’s a good idea. We really need an element to wrap all the <p>s,
  | > <ul>s, <ol>s, <figure>s, <table>s ... etc of a blog post.
  |
  | That’s called <article>.
  

  This approach identifies the first <article> element on the page as containing the main content. Here’s the algorithm for this approach.

  Proposed solution No 3 : An example heuristic approach

  The readability plugin has been developed to make Web pages readable by essentially removing all the non-main content from a page. An early source of readability is available. This demonstrates what a heuristic approach can perform.

  Analysing alternative solutions

  Comparison

  I’ve picked 4 typical Websites (top on Alexa) to analyse how these three different approaches fare. Ideally, I’d like to simply apply the above three scripts and compare pictures. However, since the semantic HTML5 elements <header>, <aside>, <nav>, and <footer> are not actually used by any of these Web sites, I don’t actually have this choice.

  So, instead, I decided to make some assumptions of where these semantic elements would be used and what the outcome of applying the first two algorithms would be. I can then compare it to the third, which is a product so we can take screenshots.

  Google.com

  http://google.com – search for “Scooby Doo”.

  The search results page would likely be built with :

  • a <nav> menu for the Google bar
  • a <header> for the search bar
  • another <header> for the login section
  • another <nav> menu for the search types
  • a <div> to contain the rest of the page
  • a <div> for the app bar with the search number
  • a few <aside>s for the left and right column
  • a set of <article>s for the search results

  “Scooby Doo” would find the first element after the headers as the “main content”. This is the element before the app bar in this case. Interestingly, there is a <div @id=main> already in the current Google results page, which “Scooby Doo” would likely also pick. However, there are a nav bar and two asides in this div, which clearly should not be part of the “main content”. Google actually placed a @role=main on a different element, namely the one that encapsulates all the search results.

  “First Article” would find the first search result as the “main content”. While not quite the same as what Google intended – namely all search results – it is close enough to be useful.

  The “readability” result is interesting, since it is not able to identify the main text on the page. It is actually aware of this problem and brings a warning before displaying this page :

  

  Facebook.com

  https://facebook.com

  A user page would likely be built with :

  • a <header> bar for the search and login bar
  • a <div> to contain the rest of the page
  • an <aside> for the left column
  • a <div> to contain the center and right column
  • an <aside> for the right column
  • a <header> to contain the center column “megaphone”
  • a <div> for the status posting
  • a set of <article>s for the home stream

  “Scooby Doo” would find the first element after the headers as the “main content”. This is the element that contains all three columns. It’s actually a <div @id=content> already in the current Facebook user page, which “Scooby Doo” would likely also pick. However, Facebook selected a different element to place the @role=main : the center column.

  “First Article” would find the first news item in the home stream. This is clearly not what Facebook intended, since they placed the @role=main on the center column, above the first blog post’s title. “First Article” would miss that title and the status posting.

  The “readability” result again disappoints but warns that it failed :

  

  YouTube.com

  http://youtube.com

  A video page would likely be built with :

  • a <header> bar for the search and login bar
  • a <nav> for the menu
  • a <div> to contain the rest of the page
  • a <header> for the video title and channel links
  • a <div> to contain the video with controls
  • a <div> to contain the center and right column
  • an <aside> for the right column with an <article> per related video
  • an <aside> for the information below the video
  • a <article> per comment below the video

  “Scooby Doo” would find the first element after the headers as the “main content”. This is the element that contains the rest of the page. It’s actually a <div @id=content> already in the current YouTube video page, which “Scooby Doo” would likely also pick. However, YouTube’s related videos and comments are unlikely to be what the user would regard as “main content” – it’s the video they are after, which generously has a <div id=watch-player>.

  “First Article” would find the first related video or comment in the home stream. This is clearly not what YouTube intends.

  The “readability” result is not quite as unusable, but still very bare :

  

  Wikipedia.com

  http://wikipedia.com (“Overscan” page)

  A Wikipedia page would likely be built with :

  • a <header> bar for the search, login and menu items
  • a <div> to contain the rest of the page
  • an &ls; article> with title and lots of text
  • <article> an <aside> with the table of contents
  • several <aside>s for the left column

  Good news : “Scooby Doo” would find the first element after the headers as the “main content”. This is the element that contains the rest of the page. It’s actually a <div id=”content” role=”main”> element on Wikipedia, which “Scooby Doo” would likely also pick.

  “First Article” would find the title and text of the main element on the page, but it would also include an <aside>.

  The “readability” result is also in agreement.

  

  Results

  In the following table we have summarised the results for the experiments :

  Site	Scooby-Doo	First article	Readability
  Google.com	FAIL	SUCCESS	FAIL
  Facebook.com	FAIL	FAIL	FAIL
  YouTube.com	FAIL	FAIL	FAIL
  Wikipedia.com	SUCCESS	SUCCESS	SUCCESS

  Clearly, Wikipedia is the prime example of a site where even the simple approaches find it easy to determine the main content on the page. WordPress blogs are similarly successful. Almost any other site, including news sites, social networks and search engine sites are petty hopeless with the proposed approaches, because there are too many elements that are used for layout or other purposes (notifications, hidden areas) such that the pre-determined list of semantic elements that are available simply don’t suffice to mark up a Web page/application completely.

  Conclusion

  It seems that in general it is impossible to determine which element(s) on a Web page should be the “main” piece of content that accessibility tools jump to when requested, that a search engine should put their focus on, or that should be highlighted to a general user to read. It would be very useful if the author of the Web page would provide a hint through a <main> element where that main content is to be found.

  I think that the <main> element becomes particularly useful when combined with a default keyboard shortcut in browsers as proposed by Steve : we may actually find that non-accessibility users will also start making use of this shortcut, e.g. to get to videos on YouTube pages directly without having to tab over search boxes and other interactive elements, etc. Worthwhile markup indeed.

• Working a mac application that needs to encode video [closed]

  9 février 2013, par Anand

  I am pretty new to xcode world. I am looking for a Tutorial to help me out to create a mac osx xcode project that encodes one format of video to other.
  For example the app will take and avi file and convert it to mp4.
  I see that ffmpeg and other libraries are available but none i am aware of how to use them in a xcode project.
  I am looking for a very very simple form of http://handbrake.fr/ mac application.

  A link to - simple step by step explanation of how to use a simple dylib file would do.

• Investigating Steam for Linux

  1er mars 2013, par Multimedia Mike — Game Hacking

  Valve recently released the final, public version of their Steam client for Linux, and the Linux world rejoiced. At least, it probably did. The announcement was 2 weeks ago on Valentine’s Day and I had other things on my mind, so I missed any fanfare. When framed in this manner, the announcement timing becomes suspect– it’s as though Linux enthusiasts would have plenty of time that day or something.

  
  
  

  Taming the Frontier
  Speculation about a Linux Steam client had been kicking around for nearly as long as Steam has existed. However, sometime last year, the rumors became more substantive.

  I naturally wondered how to port something like Steam to Linux. I have some experience with trying to make a necessarily binary-only program that runs on Linux. I’m fairly well-versed in the assorted technical challenges that one might face when attempting such a feat. Because of this, whenever I hear rumors that a company might be entertaining the notion of porting a major piece of proprietary software to Linux, my instinctive reflex is, “What ?! Why, you fools ?! Save yourselves !”

  At least, that’s how it used to be. The proposal of developing a proprietary binary for Linux has been rendered considerably less insane by a few developments, for example :

  1. The rise of Ubuntu Linux as a quasi de facto standard for desktop Linux computing
  2. The increasing homogeneity in personal desktop computing technology

  What I would like to know is how the Steam client runs on Linux. Does it rely on any libraries being present on the system ? Or does it bring its own ? The latter is a trick that proprietary programs can use– transport all of the shared libraries that the main program binary depends upon, install them someplace out of the way on the filesystem, probably in /opt, and then make the main program a shell script which sets a preload path to rely on the known quantity libraries instead of the copies already on the system.

  Downloading and Installing the Client
  For this exercise, I installed x86_64 desktop Ubuntu 12.04 Linux on a l33t gaming rig that was totally top of the line about 5 years ago, and that someone didn’t want anymore and handed down to me recently. So it should be ideal for this project.

  At first, I was blown away– the Linux client is in a .deb package that is less than 2 MB large. I unpacked the steam.deb file and found a bunch of support libraries — mostly X11 and standard C/C++ runtimes. Just as I suspected. Still, I can’t believe how small the thing is. However, my amazement quickly abated when I actually ran Steam and saw this :

  
  
  

  So it turns out steam.db is just the installer program which immediately proceeds to download an additional 160+ MB of data. So there’s actually a lot more information to possibly sift through.
  
  Another component of the installation is to basically run a big ‘apt-get install’ command to make sure a bunch of required packages are installed :

  
  
  

  After all these installation steps, the client was ready to run. However, whenever I tried to do so, I got this dialog which would cause Steam to close when the dialog was dismissed.

  
  
  

  Not a huge deal ; later NVIDIA drivers are fairly straightforward to install on Ubuntu Linux. After a few minutes of downloading, installing and restarting X, Steam ran with minimal complaint (it still had some issue regarding the video drivers but didn’t seem to consider it a deal-breaker).

  Using Steam on Linux

  So here’s Steam running on Linux :

  
  
  

  If you have experience with using Steam on Windows or Mac, you might observe that it looks exactly the same. I don’t have a very expansive library of games (I only started using Steam because purchasing a few computer components a few years ago entitled me to some free Steam downloads of some of the games on the list in the screenshot). I didn’t really expect any of the games to have Linux versions yet, but it turns out that the indie darling FTL : Faster Than Light has been ported to Linux. FTL was a much-heralded Kickstarter success story and sounded like something I wanted to support. I purchased this from Steam shortly after its release last year and was able to download the Linux version at no additional cost with a single click.

  It runs natively on Linux (note the Ubuntu desktop window decorations) :

  
  
  

  You might notice from the main Steam client that, despite purchasing FTL about a 1/2 year ago and starting it up at least a 1/2 dozen times, I haven’t really invested a whole lot of time into it. I only managed to get about 2 minutes further this time :

  
  
  

  What can I say ? This game just bores me to tears. It’s frustrating because I know that this is one of the cool games that all real gamers are supposed to like, but I practically catch myself nodding off every time I try to run through the tutorial. It’s strange to think that I’ve invested far more time into games that offer considerably less stimulation. That’s probably because I had far more free time compared to gaming options during those times.

  But that’s neither here nor there. We’ll file this under “games that aren’t for me.” I’m glad that people like FTL and a little indie underdog has met with such success. And I’m pleased that Steam on Linux works. It’s native and the games are also native, which is all quite laudable (there was speculation that everything would just be running on top of a Wine layer).

  Deeper Analysis
  So I set out wondering how Steam was able to create a proprietary program that would satisfy a large enough cross-section of Linux users (i.e., on different platforms and distros). Answer : well, they didn’t, per the stated requirements. The installation is only tuned to work on Ubuntu 12.04. However, it works on both 32- and 64-bit platforms, the only 2 desktop CPU platforms that matter these days (unless ARM somehow makes inroads on the desktop). The Steam client is quite clearly an x86_32 binary– look at the terminal screenshot above and observe that it’s downloading all :i386 support libraries.

  The file /usr/bin/steam isn’t a binary but a launcher shell script (something you’ll also see if you investigate /usr/bin/firefox on a Linux system). Here’s an interesting tidbit :

  function detect_platform()
  
    # Maybe be smarter someday
    # Right now this is the only platform we have a bootstrap for, so hard-code it.
    echo ubuntu12_32
  
  

  I wager that it’s possible to get Steam running on other distributions, it probably just takes a little more effort (assuming that Steam doesn’t put too much effort into thwarting such attempts).

  As for the FTL game, it comes with binaries and libraries for both x86_32 and x86_64. So, good work to the dev team for creating and testing both versions. FTL also distributes versions of the libraries it expects to work with.

  I suspect that the Steam client overall is largely a WWW rendering engine underneath the covers. That would help explain how Valve is able to achieve such a consistent look and feel, not only across OS platforms, but also through a web browser. When I browse the Steam store through Google Chrome, it looks and feels exactly like the native desktop client. When I first thought of how someone could port Steam to Linux, I immediately wondered about how they would do the UI.

  A little Googling for “steam uses webkit” (just a hunch) confirms my hypothesis.