A place for customers to chat about Realmac and its products - RapidWeaver, Clear and Ember!

Nibbler, an exciting new web utility

Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
edited May 2010 in Tips, Tricks and How To's
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
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

Comments

  • Jamie KelleyJamie Kelley Vancouver, BCPosts: 252Members
    edited 2:45PM
    Very cool and interesting. my score 6.9
    Warm regards,

    Jamie
    web3media.ca
  • Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
    edited 2:45PM
    on 1275081761:
    Very cool and interesting. my score 6.9

    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
    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
  • joeworkmanjoeworkman SF Bay Area, CAPosts: 2,359Members
    edited 2:45PM
    Interesting report output....

    http://joeworkman.net - Score: 8.1 Age: 2003
    Now go forth and make your websites great...
    I have the biggest stacks store out there. Build your own theme with my Foundation Theme + Stacks.
    I wrote the book on RapidWeaver. Follow me on Twitter
  • WebKarnageWebKarnage Sussex UKPosts: 3,016Moderators
    edited 2:45PM
    Sort of interesting, although telling me I've got no feed 'cos you only tested 5 pages and didn't include the one called 'blog' seems odd....

    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.
    Theme Editing Basics for budding theme weavers
    More @ WebKarnage
  • Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
    edited May 2010
    on 1275089598:
    Sort of interesting, although telling me I've got no feed 'cos you only tested 5 pages and didn't include the one called 'blog' seems odd....

    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 its 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.


    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
    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
  • WebKarnageWebKarnage Sussex UKPosts: 3,016Moderators
    edited 2:45PM
    on 1275090562:
    ......

    Nibbler only tests up to 5 pages, as it is their free product. They also have a commercial utility, Siteray, which ain't free.
    :)
    ....

    Andreas
    Well, that's my point I wasn't making well, that it's really an exercise to sell their other product rather than being one in itself if you ask me. Harsh view perhaps, but I'd do the same in their position, it makes solid business sense.

    with best regards,
    Karn.
    Theme Editing Basics for budding theme weavers
    More @ WebKarnage
  • Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
    edited 2:45PM
    on 1275091566:
    on 1275090562:
    ......

    Nibbler only tests up to 5 pages, as it is their free product. They also have a commercial utility, Siteray, which ain't free.
    :)
    ....

    Andreas
    Well, that's my point I wasn't making well, that it's really an exercise to sell their other product rather than being one in itself if you ask me. Harsh view perhaps, but I'd do the same in their position, it makes solid business sense.

    with best regards,
    Karn.

    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.
    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
  • shukapawshukapaw AlaskaPosts: 1,906Members
    edited 2:45PM
    ElStacko.com scored an 8.4.

    Brian

  • Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
    edited 2:45PM
    on 1275113517:
    ElStacko.com scored an 8.4.

    Brian

    ...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
    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
  • Steffen GraumannSteffen Graumann Ribe, DenmarkPosts: 56Members
    edited 2:45PM
    My webpage is an oldie from 1989 but score 7.9.

    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?
  • Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
    edited May 2010
    on 1275150594:
    My webpage is an oldie from 1989 but score 7.9.

    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
    Picture 5.png
    934 x 575 - 171B
    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
  • JenneilJenneil Posts: 165Members
    edited 2:45PM
    7.3 score for now and still have to add "actual" content to the site/blogs, meta data, and adverts at a minimum. There has to be something wrong with the algorithm used if I am already achieving this score.


    http://nibbler.silktide.com/reports/www.hellomeetworld.com
  • ·[RapidBase]··[RapidBase]· Bingen am Rhein, GermanyPosts: 660Members
    edited 2:45PM
    Hmm, don't get it. Is a high score (for example "8.5") good or bad? As you see in the attached screenshot, my site scores an overall of 8.5, which is stated as "very poor". But "Marketing" has a score of 4.0, which is also stated as "very poor". No, I really don't get it ...

    Best, Matthias
    fichtmedia.jpg
    925 x 564 - 157B
    FichtMedia // Print- & Web-Dienstleistungen
    Schulungen & Workshops für RapidWeaver!
    RapidBase // Das RapidWeaver Info-Portal
    shuffleskins.de // Mein Schutzfolien-Onlineshop
  • JenneilJenneil Posts: 165Members
    edited June 2010
    on 1275354292:
    Hmm, don't get it. Is a high score (for example "8.5") good or bad? As you see in the attached screenshot, my site scores an overall of 8.5, which is stated as "very poor". But "Marketing" has a score of 4.0, which is also stated as "very poor". No, I really don't get it ...

    Best, Matthias

    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?
  • Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
    edited 2:45PM
    on 1275354292:
    Hmm, don't get it. Is a high score (for example "8.5") good or bad? As you see in the attached screenshot, my site scores an overall of 8.5, which is stated as "very poor". But "Marketing" has a score of 4.0, which is also stated as "very poor". No, I really don't get it ...

    Best, Matthias

    Matthias,

    It must have been a temporary glitch. Here are your site's scores as I see them:
    Picture 1.png
    937 x 576 - 183B
    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
  • Steffen GraumannSteffen Graumann Ribe, DenmarkPosts: 56Members
    edited 2:45PM
    on 1275400292:
    on 1275354292:
    Hmm, don't get it. Is a high score (for example "8.5") good or bad? As you see in the attached screenshot, my site scores an overall of 8.5, which is stated as "very poor". But "Marketing" has a score of 4.0, which is also stated as "very poor". No, I really don't get it ...

    Best, Matthias

    Matthias,

    It must have been a temporary glitch. Here are your site's scores as I see them:

    The same glitch I had ...
  • Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
    edited 2:45PM
    The Nibbler algorithm was changed, recently. For a couple for weeks there was a problem with their W3C validation provider, and all sites showed as W3C compliant. Now that the problem is fixed, all my sites show as non-W3C compliant, most by a wide margin. It is not uncommon for some of my sites to show more than 2000 errors! It looks like the common culprits are FormLoom and RapidAlbum, both generating 90% of the errors in the code.

    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
    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
  • JenneilJenneil Posts: 165Members
    edited 2:45PM
    on 1276461379:
    The Nibbler algorithm was changed, recently. For a couple for weeks there was a problem with their W3C validation provider, and all sites showed as W3C compliant. Now that the problem is fixed, all my sites show as non-W3C compliant, most by a wide margin. It is not uncommon for some of my sites to show more than 2000 errors! It looks like the common culprits are FormLoom and RapidAlbum, both generating 90% of the errors in the code.

    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

    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.
  • Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
    edited 2:45PM
    W3C compliance

    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
    Picture 13.png
    715 x 801 - 135B
    Picture 14.png
    716 x 226 - 35B
    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
  • ColorwaveColorwave A rock in the middle of the Pacific OceanPosts: 1,442Members, Moderators
    edited June 2010
    My most recent client project came up with a 6.9, my personal site scored a 7.8.

    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.
  • Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
    edited 2:45PM
    on 1277849604:
    My most recent client project came up with a 6.9, my personal site scored a 7.8.

    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.

    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
    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
  • waxhawmacguywaxhawmacguy Waxhaw, North Carolina USAPosts: 497Developers
    edited 2:45PM
    Hi all,

    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
    NEW! RW/Writer Blog Stacks & Web App!
    Get the Blueball FreeStack Responsive Theme!
    The stacks theme that gives you 1000s of responsive layouts! Includes 22 FreeStack Responsive stacks, theme variations & more!
    Blueball Google Group
  • Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
    edited 2:45PM
    on 1277850698:
    Hi all,

    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


    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.
    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
  • waxhawmacguywaxhawmacguy Waxhaw, North Carolina USAPosts: 497Developers
    edited June 2010
    on 1277906607:
    on 1277850698:
    Hi all,

    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


    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.


    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
    NEW! RW/Writer Blog Stacks & Web App!
    Get the Blueball FreeStack Responsive Theme!
    The stacks theme that gives you 1000s of responsive layouts! Includes 22 FreeStack Responsive stacks, theme variations & more!
    Blueball Google Group
  • Andreas BelivanakisAndreas Belivanakis GreecePosts: 268Members
    edited 2:45PM
    on 1277924709:
    on 1277906607:
    on 1277850698:
    Hi all,

    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


    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.


    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


    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
    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
  • davidmacddavidmacd ScotlandPosts: 5Members
    edited 2:45PM
    on 1277906607:
    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.

    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.