Welcome to the RapidWeaver Community Forums, where you can chat with RapidWeaver users from around the world!
Nibbler, an exciting new web utility
Andreas Belivanakis
GreecePosts: 262Members
I'd like to bring the attention of the RapidWeaver community to an exciting new web utility called Nibbler.
Nibbler is a web-based utility, still in alpha, that tests web sites using objective criteria and assigns a score from 0 to 10. It just so happens, that in my limited testing, my RapidWeaver-based designs get a relatively high score of 6.7 to 9.0 compared to my clueless, Microsoft Windows-using, FrontPage2003-wielding, table-for-layout applying, Windows-1253 encoding, sorry excuse for competition.
You may visit my website http://www.milosweb.com to view a couple of flash-based presentations on Nibbler test scores. The lowest score a website of mine has received thus far has been 6.7, and that's for an under-construction website! This score is also the highest my hapless competition could muster. I swear, I had nothing to do with it. It was all RealMac's RapidWeaver and the excellent theme designs of Henk Vrieselaar and seyDoggy I have been using, as well as the various plug-ins of the conscientious RapidWeaver developers.
It would be interesting to see how the websites of the rest of you score on Nibbler. I'd like to ask that all who read this message respond by publishing the URL of your website(s) with their associated Nibbler score(s), plus the website's age.
To start, I'd like to publish my highest scoring website:
www.milosweb.com - Nibbler: 9.0 - website age: 2006
At the same time, I'd like to invite all RapidWeaver theme and plug-in developers to chime in, with comments on how their themes and plug-ins are (or can be) optimized further for SEO and higher Nibbler scores.
Andreas
Nibbler is a web-based utility, still in alpha, that tests web sites using objective criteria and assigns a score from 0 to 10. It just so happens, that in my limited testing, my RapidWeaver-based designs get a relatively high score of 6.7 to 9.0 compared to my clueless, Microsoft Windows-using, FrontPage2003-wielding, table-for-layout applying, Windows-1253 encoding, sorry excuse for competition.
You may visit my website http://www.milosweb.com to view a couple of flash-based presentations on Nibbler test scores. The lowest score a website of mine has received thus far has been 6.7, and that's for an under-construction website! This score is also the highest my hapless competition could muster. I swear, I had nothing to do with it. It was all RealMac's RapidWeaver and the excellent theme designs of Henk Vrieselaar and seyDoggy I have been using, as well as the various plug-ins of the conscientious RapidWeaver developers.
It would be interesting to see how the websites of the rest of you score on Nibbler. I'd like to ask that all who read this message respond by publishing the URL of your website(s) with their associated Nibbler score(s), plus the website's age.
To start, I'd like to publish my highest scoring website:
www.milosweb.com - Nibbler: 9.0 - website age: 2006
At the same time, I'd like to invite all RapidWeaver theme and plug-in developers to chime in, with comments on how their themes and plug-ins are (or can be) optimized further for SEO and higher Nibbler scores.
Andreas
RapidWeaver 4.2.2 and 4.5 beta (aka RW5) • Mac OS X 10.5.8 and 10.6.8 • iMac 3.06GHz and MacBook 13" Aluminum.
MilosWeb | Milos Island
MilosWeb | Milos Island
Comments
Jamie
web3media.ca
Tip:
If your website's thumbnail fails to show up, wait a few minutes and refresh (no need to retest) the Nibbler results page. In most cases, your thumbnail will show up.
Andreas
MilosWeb | Milos Island
http://joeworkman.net - Score: 8.1 Age: 2003
Joe
Check out my Stacks Store with over 130+ Stacks available!!!
Video, Fancy Image, Sliders, Table, RSS, CMS, Responsive Stacks and much more...
Follow Me on Twitter
Check out my Rapidweaver Book coming Summer 2012.
Really shocked that apparently Google says I have 26 pages linking to my site and Yahoo over 8000!! What??
Lost scores because I don't use GA too, although it's never benefited me when I did in the past.
Score 8-9.5 for technology and usability for various sites.
www.sussexguitarteacher.co.uk scores 8.0 despite an incredibly poor marketing score (first on Google for it's local search doesn't count!)
Sort of odd really, don't think I'll look again, but an interesting idea. Just a little blinkered to their own way of thinking, and I don't know how something trying to do this could avoid that. It's bound to happen.
with best regards,
Karn.
More @ WebKarnage hosted on RapidWeaver friendly Hosting.
MacSupportCasts to learn Macs
Keep in mind, it's still in Alpha stage. Their algorithm has not been finalized yet.
Nibbler only tests up to 5 pages, as it is their free product. They also have a commercial utility, Siteray, which ain't free.
The developers of Nibbler welcome feedback, so feel free to add your input. There is always a link to feedback on the results page.
Andreas
MilosWeb | Milos Island
with best regards,
Karn.
More @ WebKarnage hosted on RapidWeaver friendly Hosting.
MacSupportCasts to learn Macs
That's probably true, and it does make business sense, but I have been following them for a while now and I can say with certainty that the developers have been hard at work on Nibbler. They do not seem to treat it as a second-rate product in any sense of the word.
MilosWeb | Milos Island
Brian
Get some of the coolest, most eye-catching stacks available.
Add the "wow-factor" your site deserves!
...with website age: 2002. Good job, Brian!
I have been wondering how to increase this value. Most of my RapidWeaver sites earn a 2006, while my competition usually gets 1989-1998.
Website age does not affect the overall score, however.
Andreas
MilosWeb | Milos Island
But I'm confused when it says that every score is "Very Poor". The score is from 2.8 to 9.4, how can a high and a low score both be "Very Poor". Is it a high or a low score that I should be aiming for?
Your homepage gets a 7.9, Steffen, not bad! The website age is the lowest possible, however, at 1989.
http://nibbler.silktide.com/reports/www.picxel.dk
In any case, you aim for a high score. You may use the feedback link on the bottom of the results page to contact the developers of Nibbler for any clarifications you need or feedback you might have.
Andreas
MilosWeb | Milos Island
http://nibbler.silktide.com/reports/www.hellomeetworld.com
Best, Matthias
Schulungen & Workshops für RapidWeaver!
RapidBase // Das RapidWeaver Info-Portal
Must be a glitch. My lowest category score is 6.6 and it labels those as "good".
Did you try to retest the site to see if anything changes?
Matthias,
It must have been a temporary glitch. Here are your site's scores as I see them:
MilosWeb | Milos Island
The same glitch I had ...
Along with the W3C non-compliance, my scores have taken a substantial hit as well. Technology scores go down usually by more than 2 points, seriously affecting overall scores.
What is everyone else's experience? Are you seeing a dive in your Nibbler scores as well? What plug-ins are responsible for most of your errors? Any recommendations or solutions?
Andreas
MilosWeb | Milos Island
Mine dropped to 7.0 from 7.3 and I noticed the W3C compliance is also showing errors now. I am not yet finished with the website, but when I am I am going to have to dig through that report to figure out how to correct some of those errors and other issues it mentions.
If I wanted to do it on purpose, I wouldn't have been able to do it.
1593 errors and 5 warnings on 5 pages? To quote Janice, an occasional guest on the TV show "Friends": "Oh, My God!"
It looks like RapidAlbum and FormLoom are the worst offenders, even though there are errors on the home page as well. The description of these errors is rather esoteric. How can these errors be resolved?
Here is the website's URL:
http://www.asterias-suites.com/
I am attaching two screen shots from the W3C compliance Nibbler test results.
Andreas
MilosWeb | Milos Island
Interestingly, I got hundreds of W3C compliance errors with the new site, almost all related to using Collage II, whereas my personal site that uses RapidAlbumn got nor errors or warnings whatsoever.
How worried should I be about the W3C errors? I still struggling with some intermittent IE problems that I have posted about on this forum where backgrounds aren't showing up for the body and menus, but no issues with the Collage pages that returned the errors working.
The information on Nibbler about links to my sites is totally wrong according to Google Analylitics. Google says 30 something and Nibbler says 1.
Ron
Colorwave Imaging & Colorwave Hosting
Keep in mind you can converse with the Nibbler development team via their feedback mechanism.
Personally, I am very worried about W3C compliance errors. If anything, RapidWeaver is W3C compliant by default, but it seems that the moment you add a plug-in or two, W3C compliance goes straight to Hell.
Part of the reason I tried to introduce Nibbler to the RapidWeaver community with this thread is my intention to spark a grass-root effort to hold plug-in and theme developers accountable for their offerings. W3C compliance is important, and there should be no compromise on our part simply because we use a certain theme, snippet or plug-in. Developers ought to offer advice on how to maintain W3C compliance through proper techniques, dos and don'ts using their product. They should also make their products W3C compliant by default, as opposed to the other way around.
In addition, RealMac Software should work with both users and developers to help maintain W3C compliance for each and every RapidWeaver site that hits the web, without pointing fingers to 3rd parties or attempting to absolve themselves from this very important issue.
Andreas
MilosWeb | Milos Island
I just remembered an email from a Rapidweaver user using our Designer Colors theme earlier this year about his high ranking on Nibbler so I went to the site to see where he's at now.
Looks like his site: www.prepress-projects.co.uk is currently ranked 4th on Nibbler so Rapidweaver sites can definitely get a good ranking on Nibbler.
Here's the Nibbler link for his site: http://nibbler.silktide.com/reports/www.prepress-projects.co.uk
Anyway, just thought it was pretty cool to see and wanted to let you know it was definitely possible to achieve with a Rapidweaver generated site.
Best,
Charlie
The only theme that gives you 1000s of layouts! Includes 23 FreeStack Responsive stacks, theme variations & more!
Want linkable hot spots on your images? Get our Imagemapper Stacks!
Blueball Google Group
This is great! I am happy for you and this RapidWeaver user.
Of course, this site uses hardly any plug-ins. The problem is, there is ample evidence the moment we start using 3rd-party plug-ins, W3C compliance goes straight to Hell.
MilosWeb | Milos Island
Hi Andreas,
Not disagreeing with you at all. Merely wanted to show that it's possible to achieve a high ranking site on Nibbler with a Rapidweaver generated site is all.
Keep in mind that any CSS3 code used in a plugin for example will not validate yet. Doesn't mean that it's not valid CSS code just that it is still waiting for approval by the W3C. My suggestion is to keep your third party plugin use to a minimal amount in your site if you want a higher ranking on Nibbler and your site to validate now.
Best,
Charlie
The only theme that gives you 1000s of layouts! Includes 23 FreeStack Responsive stacks, theme variations & more!
Want linkable hot spots on your images? Get our Imagemapper Stacks!
Blueball Google Group
Hi Charlie,
No disagreement here.
I'm afraid it is impossible to keep plug-in use to a minimum, if I want a functional website. I am not talking about huge sites, either. Most of my sites are 8-12 pages.
As for CSS3, I tried it once, got my layouts completely screwed up the moment I tried "tidied" and never tried it again.
I have to use PlusKit since I need the @import function to make sure that say, all my sidebars display the same information.
I have standardized on stacks since they are a very flexible tool for designing my pages.
And I absolutely need photo galleries and contact forms (formloom).
It seems that no matter what I do, I get abysmal results in validation. I have no control over it, and apparently, my plug-ins are the culprits. I want the developers and RealMac to own up to their products, and believe what I'm asking is only fair.
Andreas
MilosWeb | Milos Island
That's our site. It's true that we don't use many plugins, but we do use the very popular (and excellent) Stacks and Blocks from YourHead, and both of these play nicely with Nibbler as evidenced by the 10/10 technology score. These plugins are used on the pages Nibbler tests.
We haven't gone out of our way to get a high Nibbler score although it does help identify things needing addressed. Many of the things that Nibbler picks up are really just about adopting good practice, such as having Alt text for images, appropriate meta tags or using analytics. And, of course, having a robust well-constructed theme helps, such as those from BlueBall Design (and Charlie did not pay me to say that!).
Our site is exactly as published from RW with no external processing or manipulation. In my opinion, RW + a BlueBall theme + Blocks + Stacks = a potential Top Hundred, possible Top Twenty, Nibbler score.