Project utilizes AngularJS, Bootstrap and KendoUI. Issue is, Kendo advertises that it "integrates" with Bootstrap, when in fact it only really mimics bootstrap styles.
I've got a LESS workflow established with grunt, proper Bootstrap variable overrides and all, but I'm having the damnedest time finding source files for KendoUI.
All the documentation I've come across wants you to use some Theme Builder tool, but this isn't ideal. When you use the themebuilder, it includes a LESS file with variables, but I can't find the source LESS files for KendoUI Pro (which I've purchased a license for, so you'd think they'd serve it up on a platter.)
For anyone in the sorry position of having to use Kendo, you have to get the source files from the Telerik Control Panel.
Also, have fun tracking down the variables because their scattered across the four winds within the LESS files for both the core and theme packages.
Related
I am trying to help out an organization that hired some developers to create their website back in 2016, and the developers haven't touched the site since 2016.
I don't know enough about Sage to know if the developers really screwed things up, or if what they have done is the way things need to be done in Sage. One example of something that has me scratching my head (in between banging it on my keyboard): some page content - content that needs to be updated on at least a yearly basis - is hard-coded into template files, so that in order to update the information, you have to go in past the warnings about using the Theme Editor, figure out which included template contains the content, and update it there.
NOT something your typical office employee is likely to be able to do, yes?
My question is: is it even worth trying to keep this site running under Sage, or should I rebuild the site using a more user-friendly template? The site currently has fewer than 2 dozen pages plus a dozen or so posts and I would say is unlikely to get a whole lot larger, given the available resources.
Thanks for any advice you can offer.
The problem to me doesn't seem to be so much about the Roots Sage theme framework, but that the developers didn't follow the most basic rules regarding WordPress theme development--separating the content from presentation. Hardcoding content into a template is just bad practice, and this would make any site difficult to edit no matter what framework it was built on.
If it's as simple as printing the content into a template so that page editor content changes can be reflected on the frontend, it may be a simple as adding the_content() to the corresponding page template overrides and removing the hardcoded content.
FWIW: Sage 8 templates are not that different from your standard WP templates, it's not using a templating engine like Blade, so you should be able to customize the templates if you're already familiar with standard WP templates.
So probably no need to burn it all down.
I have created a webapp using Wix, which relies heavily on the repeater element to display content from a database inside a repeating element. Repeaters do pretty much exactly what I want, but I realize they are built on a pretty sophisticated API, and there's a lot of stuff making this happen in the background.
Ultimately for this project, a native iOS app is the end goal. However, I have no experience in xcode - but willing to learn. Before I get in too deep, is there any kind of functionality I could find to achieve something like this?
Thanks in advance
You can't convert Wix Repeater element to Xcode. But, you can make deep customization to your Wix elements by using Wix Corvid.
If you not familiar with it, it's is a developing platform integrated into the Wix ecosystem that allows users to build advanced sites. Among other things, it’s able to create and manage databases, build dynamic pages, host user-generated content and more.
JavaScript newbie here. I'm new to Angular2 and am currently learning about things like module-loaders (there's so many!), etc, so bear with me since my space of "unknown unknowns" is probably quite large.
I'm interested in creating a JavaScript based "Packaged Web App" for windows ("Packaged" in the sense that the JS is included in the Universal Windows Platform app).
One constraint to keep in mind is that I have severe limitations on the size of my packaged app. The smaller, the better.
With that in mind, I have a few specific questions that will hopefully expose the extent of my ignorance:
Without resorting to Electron or Ionic2, is it possible (also, is it a good idea) to create the offline experience in Angular2 and then only manually include the resulting transpiled .js files in my Visual Studio project?
How hard is it to manage the dependencies for these transpiled files? Are they entirely self contained?
Roughly how large would the minimum set of manually imported files end up being? When I use NPM to install angular2, it winds up being ~80mb - a large portion of this (most?) looks like dev tools, test infrastructure, etc. What's the minimal set of angular dependencies needed for the client app to work?
Thanks!
Without resorting to Electron or Ionic2, is it possible (also, is it a good idea) to create the offline experience in Angular2 and then only manually include the resulting transpiled .js files in my Visual Studio project?
Yes, it is possible. TypeScript will be compiled to javascript codes, which will be consumed by your project. So eventually, it is compiled js codes that will be necessary for your project.
But, if you are so worried about your project's size, then I suggest you using Angular 1, which is only JS codes. And for the minimum size of Angular 1 and its dependency jquery. There is a compressed version of Angular 1 (angular.min.js: 164kb) and jquery(jquery-3.1.1.min.js: 85kb).
Answering my own question here:
Yes, it's possible. You can copy over the transpiled .js files and then simply point the webview control at the generated index.html. With that being said, it's a pretty kludgy dev experience since you're constantly working around VS.
The dependencies are handled for you - it's all in the minified/uglified js files.
I haven't investigated tree-shaking yet, but it looks like I can get away with ~0.5Mb with a skeleton project.
What I should do except writing owner Site.css? It is possible to give writing Site.css to designer without any worry about merger functionallity and design?
I wrote an intro blog post on theming Orchard.
On my latest project the designer in our team read it so he could turn his designs into an Orchard Template.
The key thing we found was that the designer needed to have his own local version of Orchard running that he could make changes to and see the affects. We had him running it through Visual Studio, but Web Matrix or IIS running locally with him using his own editor of choice would have been just as good.
A combination of the Developer module and visual studio helped him work out what was what.
My article is not pitched at designers though, so I did pair him with a developer at first to get him started. This worked really well and the designer now feels confident and can make new templates from scratch by himself.
It depends on what you are trying to do. In some cases, CSS is enough. In some cases, not, and you also need to change layout and a number of other templates. CSS should be no problem for your designer. For templates, they just have to understand what the #{}, #() and # are doing and learn not to touch these parts and work around them. Good web designers should be used to that sort of thing.
basically, my question is pretty much similar and has been asked numerous times. Which WYSIWYG editor is better now that Telerik has released their MVC editor, would it be wise to purchase the entire suite instead?
Selections:
TinyMCE
CKEditor
Telerik MVC Editor
Disclaimer: As part of the Telerik MVC team (and one of the editor developers), my opinion is quite biased, yet I can shed some light on the differences between the editors.
All of them are open source
Despite Todd's answer, the Telerik MVC editor is open-source, under GPLv2 license (with a commercial license available). Our support is well known, so I guess this is where we stand out (though it is paid). On the other hand, both TinyMCE and CKEditor have huge communities, which may help quickly, too.
Different feature set
This has been the first release of the Telerik MVC editor, while CK and TinyMCE have been around the block for a very long time. We have mixed feelings about this -- while we are missing out on quite a few tools/features, we have invested a lot of time in polishing the existing ones (converting list items to headings, pasting from MS Word). Our bet is on cleaner, more robust code (4k LoC vs 14k LoC in TinyMCE without plug-ins).
It depends on your requirements
After all, with the Telerik suite, you get... well... a suite of components with common code and themes. So if you need the dedicated support and the other components and the limited feature set does not make a difference, Telerik would be a nice choice. If you need a full-scale editor and want to bet on more feature-complete products, TinyMCE and CKEditor are the wiser choice.
I hope this helps and does not contain much happy talk.
Some Background:
While there are some very good third-party components for ASP.NET I tend to stay away from them for the open source alternative. The reason goes back to an issue I has with a chart component a few years ago. It had a bug that the company would not fix in the current version and instead wanted us to purchase an upgrade while not guaranteeing that would fix the problem.
They did offer a demo that we could not use in production (which was the only place we were getting the problem) so the problem continued until the component was replaced.
My Answer
From My experience I would recommend going with the open source alternative. I have used CKEditor and TinyMCE with success in PHP projects. CKEditor can be styled nicely and TinyMCE has tons of documentation from the millions of people who use it daily.
The greatest benefit to open source is being able to change the code to meet your needs or fix a problem specific to your environment.
My last ASP.NET MVC app required all components to be open source for the same reason as mentioned above with the end result being more stable than the previous that included some purchased components.
Hope this helps.
Wordpress uses TinyMCE, so I am very familiar with using it (though getting it to look like wordpress is a little bit of an undertaking).
I have successfully implemented TinyMCE into 2 of my Asp.Net MVC websites with very little effort.
As with any, there is a ramp up time, but TinyMCE has never disappointed me.
We are using CKEditor_3.x in our MVC 2 app.
It works great.
On save:
Just 1 important note, in your CKEditor config file be sure to set:
config.htmlEncodeOutput = true;
Or you will get an error message.
Later on display
You will need to decode is like:
<%=HttpUtility.HtmlDecode(Html.TextAreaFor(model => model.Description).ToHtmlString())%>
Good luck!