You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As seen in #3423 and #4026, the best choice of inlining CSS and JS file vs. embedding them as data URIs differs depending on application. I was wondering if it would be possible to have a command-line flag to embed files as base64 data URIs rather than inlining.
In my case (ecohealthalliance/cites#2), script and style tags are much tougher to make work in the context of inserting HTML outputs into R documentation, where the syntax conflicts with CSS and JSS and elaborate pre-processing of lots of escape situations would be required.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@mb21 Of course. I may be able to pull it off, but I'm not sure the R documentation format, and the packages that auto-generate it from comments, can quite handle all layered nesting of escapes required. Based on the previous issues I would guess there are other conditions where having base64 is easier to handle.
I'd also like this, just because it's easier to debug CSS in Chrome the old way than it is now. It's the difference between it letting you edit CSS as a separate file, or only in the context of a long parent HTML.
As seen in #3423 and #4026, the best choice of inlining CSS and JS file vs. embedding them as data URIs differs depending on application. I was wondering if it would be possible to have a command-line flag to embed files as base64 data URIs rather than inlining.
In my case (ecohealthalliance/cites#2), script and style tags are much tougher to make work in the context of inserting HTML outputs into R documentation, where the syntax conflicts with CSS and JSS and elaborate pre-processing of lots of escape situations would be required.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: