Looking for some assistance if anyone out there knows how (if it's possible) NetSuite's Advanced PDF can generate PDF/A compliant documents.
Most of our PDFs do not require compliance, however a handful of template do require it
I did find a reference to some meta tags, but continually get Unexpected SuiteScript Error. I downloaded Adobe's ICC profiles. Below links to "Color Match sRGB" icc profile stored in the file cabint (available without login)
The "test" template has no named fonts or transparent images.
<meta name="output-profile" value="PDF/A1b:2005"/>
<meta name="output-intent-icc" value="https://XXXXXXXXXXX.app.netsuite.com/core/media/media.nl?id=21283340&c=4203910&h=bMlY3nvM0WHZpRjt72bV2tvYUe9qW8loEWQ5TfLxcOmcKj1e&_xt=.bin"/>
<meta name="output-intent-identifier=" value="sRGB"/>
Related
I would like to know if there is a way to use meta information such as <meta property="og:image" content="image.jpg">and <meta name="twitter:image" content="tw-image.jpg">
to rather have image links to correctly sized images depending on what social platform they are being shared to.
In other words
A person from Facebook shares a link to my webpage http://www.example.com/pagex/ and facebook shows the image source i have provided fb-image.jpg at a size of 1200px x 900px so it does not crop my image.
Another person goes to share the same url http://www.example.com/pagex/ on google plus, and google plus chooses the source image i have provided gplus-image.jpg at a size of 1080px x 1080px so it shows my full image.
Another one for pinterest and another for twitter and another for linkedin
I hope this makes sense.
I'm trying to use SVG-Graphics in a CHM-File. The CHM is created by HTML Help Workshop. Unfortunately the svg files don't show in my compiled chm. (Everything works fine in HTML)
I already added this <meta> to display my SVG Graphics
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=9"/>
I need to copy my SVG-Graphics in my project (*.hhp file).
How I can do this?
Google Image Search can also filter for re-use licences of the images. I'm wondering how they know which licence an image is published under. How can I declare that licence on my website? Is it possible to declare a licence for each image on the page, or only for the entire page including all referenced images (possibly including pre-fetched content)? And what are the licences that Google understands and can classify to their filter?
I've searched around for a while and have finally found a solution, thanks to Creative Commons. In short, for Google (and other search engines) to know what license the content on a specific page is under, you have to tell it.
This is done the same way as you give Google other data like page relationships - using the HTML structure of the page. In this case, you use the rel attribute of a tags. To declare a single-page license:
License
Of course you can change the link text to whatever, but the important bit is the rel attribute. The href should point to the license itself.
I don't know how Google knows what license it is, but that's how you declare it, and Google's robots will do the magic for you. In terms of bulk licensing, I dare say you could preprocess pages with PHP (possibly in conjunction with an SQL database) to insert this license tag.
Sources:
Creative Commons Licence Chooser;
MicroFormats' RelLicense
You can also have a look at Sitepoint's definition of the rel attribute and its uses.
Hope this helps.
In this answer, I am assuming that:
You have a collection of images licensed under, say, a Creative Commons license.
You want image search engines to return your images when the user is filtering for Creative Commons-like images.
Creating metadata HTML pages
I think the best way to attach licensing information to an image is to create a canonical HTML page corresponding to each image--much like how Wikipedia or Flickr does it.
Let's say that we want to license a gallery of images under CC BY-SA 3.0 where every image has a URL of the format https://example.com/img1.jpg.
In that case, we embed the licensing information in HTML pages with URLs that look like https://example.com/img1.jpg.html.
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta charset="UTF-8" />
<title>Viewing img1.jpg</title>
<meta property="og:image" content="https://example.com/img1.jpg" />
<link rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"/>
<link rel="canonical" href="https://example.com/img1.jpg.html"/>
</head>
<body>
<div>
<img src="https://example.com/img1.jpg" />
<small>
This image is licensed under a
<a rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/">Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0)</a> license
</small>
</div>
</body>
</html>
Using schema.org metadata
We can also schema.org ImageObject metadata to our metadata pages--encoding our metadata as microdata, RDFa, or JSON-LD. The schema.org markup makes it possible to add additional annotations that describe the copyright holder and how to obtain a license to use the image.
Here is an example of a JSON-LD document that you can put inside the <head> tags.
<script type="application/ld+json">
{
"#context": "https://schema.org",
"#type": "ImageObject",
"author": "Bob Smith",
"copyrightHolder": "Bob Smith's employer",
"copyrightYear": 2021,
"contentUrl": "https://example.com/img1.jpg",
"license": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"acquireLicensePage": "https://example.com/img1.jpg.html"
}
</script>
Exposing your metadata HTML pages to search engines
Finally, you should make it easy for crawlers to find these HTML pages. You can organically pepper in links to these HTML pages whenever you embed one of your images. Alternatively, you could just list all of your HTML pages with the Sitemap Protocol.
I was provided some documentation in SGML format. Not being familiar with the format I searched the web to find a suitable viewer but cant seem to locate one. Is there such a thing as a modern SGML viewer?
There is no such thing as an SGML viewer, because SGML is not a "document format" (or "document type") that could be visually displayed.
SGML is a language that is used to describe a document type.
You need to look for a "viewer" for your specific document type, and not for SGML.
SGML document types
You need to find out which document type your SGML file uses, and then find a viewer for that document type. You can see which document type your SGML file uses at the very top of the SGML file, where it says <!DOCTYPE .... E.g for a file that uses the document type XHTML it looks like this:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" []>
Document types described using SGML might be:
ATA iSpec 2200 AMM
CMM (Component Maintenance Manual)
HTML4
...
(SGML document types are described by "document type definitions" (DTD).)
Viewers / Editors
Of course, for HTML the "viewer" would be a web browser.
For other formats, the "viewer" (or "editor") will often be some kind of custom software, such as Arbortext Editor with custom extensions, or custom scripts or software that converts this specific document type into e.g. PDF. There is usually some kind of "styling file" involved, like CSS or FOSI, which describes how each element should be formatted and layouted.
Sometimes, the SGML files are not meant to be displayed as a whole at all, but are used to store data or transfer data between data bases and other software, which might only display small portions of the data at once.
I recently was browsing a local web design firm's portfolio and found all their sites' code begins as such:
<meta name="keywords" content="a whole bunch of keywords for their site">
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
...
I was able to determine that the pages were generated by dreamweaver (at least in part).
Did dreamweaver do this, or did their "developer" just paste the code at the top of the document.
It is my impulse that this is bad practice and it might work incorrectly on some platforms but it got me wondering as to whether or not their may be a reason for this?
That is a terrible practice and invalid HTML. I bet that this would throw IE directly into quirks mode.
But as for your question, either the developer is a script kiddie and shoved the <meta> tag in there with little knowledge of the outcomes, or Dreamweaver did it. I hope it was Dreamweaver...
FYI - just had this issue and Dreamweaver does not put the meta tags in the correct position automatically. Cursor must be placed beforehand into an editable region.