The classical answer is that the S stands for Server-Side-Incude (SSI). SSI source typically uses the extension .shtml. More info:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Side_Includes

Just last week I updated one of those for Retina/HDPI:

https://houptlab.org/img/made-on-a-mac-20221117.png

But it's not 88x31 D:

Ah, but it's (roughly) 88x31 CSS Pixels!

HiDPI is normally 2x res. Aka 176x62 would be correct.

Thanks [I'm the author]. I tested with Chrome 105 on macOS and it succeeded. Possibly there are OS/plugin/etc issues?

Of course, I know there is no guarantee that every browsers innerHTML implementation will produce exactly the same result, but so far I haven't found any variation (Chrome, FF, Safari, Edge).

In Firefox 105.0.1 on MacOS, the button also always fails when I click it.

EDIT: In my case, it appears to be some extra "<div style=\"position: static !important;\"></div>" text added before the closing </body> tag. I suspect this is introduced by a plugin, probably LastPass.

Fails on Safari on iPadOS 15.6.1 too.

edit: another commenter says ad blockers are the culprit.

It also fails on Firefox 104 on Linux.

I think this was a bug in the site, which appears to now been fixed.

Note that HTTP is also upgraded if the UA requests it with the Upgrade-Insecure-Requests header:

  $ curl -I -H 'Upgrade-Insecure-Requests: 1' 'http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html'
  HTTP/1.1 307 Temporary Redirect
  location: https://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html
  vary: Upgrade-Insecure-Requests

w3.org redirect to www.w3.org, but not HTTPS. This makes sense for the standards org that defines HTTP, and needs to maintain backwards compatibility.

Except the standards org that defines HTTP is the IETF, not the W3C...

Opps! You're right, the W3C only helped author it.

I was also wrong to say that w3.org never redirects to HTTPS. If the browsers sends a Upgrade-Insecure-Requests HTTP-header, then it redirects. That allows it to support all browsers as securely as possible.

Sites like whynohttps.com and observatory.mozilla.org should really test for this pattern.

Have you looked at Xcode Server: https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/ID... ?

Yes, and it was extremely frustrating to use (I didn‘t get it to work at all), and it also doesn‘t cover things like testing against multiple servers.

MacPaw is one tech company that has cats and a special cat room:

http://blog.macpaw.com/post/109471340953/welcome-to-the-drea...

http://officefetish.co/core/macpaw/

Fixel and Hoover are beautiful cats and I am very impressed to see an example. Personally I would be very surprised if this worked considering how territorial cats are.

Off topic, but MacPaw has got really nice software. Amazing design. It is nice to see that their office also looks as "sleek" as their apps.

They sell a "Mac cleaner" product? Aren't those scams?

Honestly, that was my impression at first. But the difference (in hindsight I've never really looked into other apps) is that they actually list ALL files they flag for removal (In Gemini 2 as well) so you do have the option to double check what the app does. You could even let it run in trial (500MB deletion limit) and then plainly look at the list and go delete it manually.

The apps are also not "mass produced", they have really nice animations and you can definitely feel that there has been a lot of effort put into them.

They also make some music player and encryption apps so they're not all cleaning apps.