Latest News: (loading..)

Stuart

Members
  • Content count

    100
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Stuart

Profile Information

  • Real Name
    Stuart Anthony
  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    UK
  1. Usually this is due to the session id being lost during the session - when you put a link in you have to add the tep_href_link statement in. However, I have just got one which is really weird, it appears when you use one link and remains in place. If you logout and leave the site (go to google and come back for example) it goes away until I use the same link again ... weird. Must be uncoupling the database is all I can think of.
  2. I'm having a similar problem only I have the A cap character in front of the £ sign on one page only (index.php) - the rest of the pages are OK. I've never seen this in a way I can't fix before as its not happening on the whole site, just the one page. I've tried the following: Force UTF-8 using htaccess (forces whole site to change client browser to UTF-8 for the session) - doesn't work Force character default to off in htaccess (forces browser to switch off default charset) - fix index.php, but then the rest of the site end up with the ? in a black box all over the place Force the php to encode in UTF-8 - no change Frankly as the <meta> statement to do with this is fine, I'm totally clueless as to what to do. index.php should just encode as UTF-8 if the meta says so, yes? Any ideas would be gratefully received
  3. NB - I am not a lawyer!! This is a minefield. The ICO have given everyone a get out clause allowing implied consent, but then imply that they would ideally want implicit consent if you are storing any personal data. They give an example of this data as being health records, or presumably the like - I would say storage of an email address is enough to put you into the danger zone. Now examples aside, it would seem to me that you need to consider if the storage of personal data on your site requires that the customer needs to accept your terms and conditions of use ... I would say yes it does even though the ICO give this advice: "The Regulations specify that service providers should not have to provide the information and obtain consent where that device is to be used: for the sole purpose of carrying out or facilitating the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network; or where such storage or access is strictly necessary to provide an information society service requested by the subscriber or user." Reason being that the data is not always strictly necessary to complete the users request on the site they are viewing. For example, if they sign up to buy something, then their address is necessary for shipping, but their telephone number may not be even though you have actually taken that for completeness. To avoid any messy popups that make the user simply deny your cookie because they are not aware of what they are being asked to do: implied consent means that you could have a tag or button in a prominent place on EVERY page allowing the user to view your privacy and cookie notices should they want to like several people have suggested - this would not necessarily detract from the look or feel of the site in any way. However, as soon as they sign up to your site they are providing personal information directly to your database, so you need implicit consent for the setting of cookies - which is ridiculous as in actual fact they are giving you the data with the knowledge that it will be stored and they have already given you implied consent to set cookies - anyway, then you will likely need them to tick a box that they agree to the privacy policies of the site, which again isn't unusual so won't detract from the users experience in any way. Just a note about the requirement of websites to adhere to this law. Again, my opinion only. This law applies to people or businesses running/owning sites that serve the EU - so amazon does or doesn't need to adhere to it ?? The law is to protect the EU citizens, and they are applying it to all businesses that they have direct legal recourse over, but international businesses have been successfully prosecuted under EU law when they are serving EU customers. So, even though amazon are literally operating from tax havens technically outside the EU, they are serving content that involve EU businesses and the affected public. Likewise for any international seller such as Apple, Microsoft, etc. So if your business is located in the USA for example, but you are serving EU clients, then this could mean you too. Additionally, it could be perceived that secondary servers based in the EU are technically affected when they are serving content to the EU as regulations would apply through the 3rd party. The bottom line is control. In my opinion, this law is ridiculous. It puts the owness on legitimate businesses to clean up the act of non-ligitimate businesses. Notwithstanding illegal entry/access, the protection of ones own personal property is literally one's own responsibility. If you trawl the internet via your computer and get viruses etc as a result, then you were responsible for protecting yourself in the first place. If you sign up for services without first reading the terms and conditions of the seller or information provider, then you are at fault. Your use of a search engine is reliant on you reading its terms and conditions of use. If you enter someone's premises, including their website, then you are agreeing that they can serve you within those premises and if that means they can use surveillance cameras to do that within their property, then so be it - a cookie is only a surveillance camera really, tracking your visit (again, notwithstanding those that are for other illegal uses). The point is that the illegal businesses will apply this in time and accurately if it means they will lose money - or they don't need to because they access the users computer in a different way. Just another example of our ineffective intrusive governments. Rant over
  4. Try SecFilterEngine Off in the htaccess file
  5. you're right - and this fix works
  6. Hi All Firstly, congrats and thanks to Chemo for the great contribution. I have installed the 2.1c version of Ultimate SEO urls on my localhost testing server. Everything seems to work in terms of the code producing the correct urls but I'm getting the dreaded: Not Found The requested URL /.../catalog/test-c-25.html was not found on this server I'm sure thats an .htaccess problem - I have this .htaccess file in my /catalog/ directory, can anyone help? # $Id: .htaccess,v 1.3 2003/06/12 10:53:20 hpdl Exp $ # # This is used with Apache WebServers # # For this to work, you must include the parameter 'Options' to # the AllowOverride configuration # # Example: # # <Directory "/usr/local/apache/htdocs"> # AllowOverride Options # </Directory> # # 'All' with also work. (This configuration is in the # apache/conf/httpd.conf file) # The following makes adjustments to the SSL protocol for Internet # Explorer browsers <IfModule mod_setenvif.c> <IfDefine SSL> SetEnvIf User-Agent ".*MSIE.*" \ nokeepalive ssl-unclean-shutdown \ downgrade-1.0 force-response-1.0 </IfDefine> </IfModule> # Fix certain PHP values # (commented out by default to prevent errors occuring on certain # servers) #<IfModule mod_php4.c> # php_value session.use_trans_sid 0 # php_value register_globals 1 #</IfModule> Options +FollowSymLinks RewriteEngine On RewriteBase /catalog/ RewriteRule ^(.*)-p-(.*).html$ product_info.php?products_id=$2&%{QUERY_STRING} RewriteRule ^(.*)-c-(.*).html$ index.php?cPath=$2&%{QUERY_STRING} RewriteRule ^(.*)-m-(.*).html$ index.php?manufacturers_id=$2&%{QUERY_STRING} RewriteRule ^(.*)-pi-(.*).html$ popup_image.php?pID=$2&%{QUERY_STRING} RewriteRule ^(.*)-t-(.*).html$ articles.php?tPath=$2&%{QUERY_STRING} RewriteRule ^(.*)-a-(.*).html$ article_info.php?articles_id=$2&%{QUERY_STRING} RewriteRule ^(.*)-pr-(.*).html$ product_reviews.php?products_id=$2&%{QUERY_STRING} RewriteRule ^(.*)-pri-(.*).html$ product_reviews_info.php?products_id=$2&%{QUERY_STRING} RewriteRule ^(.*)-i-(.*).html$ information.php?info_id=$2&%{QUERY_STRING} I've tried removing the standard code already added to the .htaccess file before the contriution code was added - but no luck yet Thanks Stuart
  7. Should be dead easy - look for the <tr> and <td> tags and move the WHOLE sections around (ie - everything inside the <tr> and </tr> markers and so on) until you get somewhere close to what you want. You can always add rows <tr>'s and columns within rows <td>'s but don't forget to end each one in the html with </tr> or </td>. You should get the layout you want like this. Good luck
  8. Hi all ... hope this helps Qwiz - First,, the issue about the links not counting on search engin rank? is this true? is links done through this a waste? The links manager is quite ingenious as it knows when a robot is searching the site and shows it the actual url. However, this relies upon the spiders text file that comes with the contribution being up to date. So even with the counter switched on, the links manager isn't a waste of time - but some webmasters don't approve of redirected links, so you might get some rejection on that basis ... if you do, just switch off the counter. Qwiz - was wondering if there are any of u programs could tell me how to get a catagory and the links in that catagory to show up in the form of a info box with the links just a text link in the info box? You mean like a nomal links page - it can be done, but you'll have to mess with the links.php file and the associated link_listing.php file in the modules folder ... I wouldn't recommend it unless you have some experience with it - but hey, you gotta start somewhere - so backup and have a go! For the formatting, you might want to play with the stylesheet and the link listing file Good luck
  9. Quick addition - someone replied to a earlier post with a quick fix for the link redirection problem - switch the counter off in admin and the link is displayed as a normal http://www.etcetc link ... Stuart
  10. For some reason I'm not getting notified of forum replies ... well done Mary - that has solved a few hours pondering r the redirection problem Great work Stuart
  11. This is for Terry re the links manager's redirect - allegedly it is spider friendly, but I can't verify this yet as I've only just installed it. The redirect is disabled if a spider bot (manually defined in spiders.txt) is cataloging the site - the bot sees the direct link to the partner, all other guests see a redirect. The redirect is there because the system has a counter on it which requires interation with the site's database prior to forwarding th user to the link partner. You are going to find that some people won't accept this because they don't believe you ... if your main links partners don't like it - then should be an easy fix which I'm going to look at in a minute and post when its sorted ... but the counter will not work any more. I'll get back to the forum in a couple of days Stuart
  12. Hi Mary Making the change is (or looks to be) quite simple - there is a function file called links.php which controls this, we could either change the function to list the url on mouseover or delete the function in the link listing and rewrite that file instead. I'll do that if I don't get an answer as to why would someone go to the lengths of programming the redirect if there was no reason for it - I'll post the solution here if I do that. I'm guessing that the redirect is to stop unwanted harvester robots going to the link partners site and spamming them to death - which is in their benefit really ... but then some link partners are quite adamant that they don't want to link with redirected url's so we're in a catch 22 there
  13. Hi - some of my links partners are not happy with the redirect as they claim that this is not counted as a link by the search engines. I have looked at the code and I can see that the actual links_url is presented to the bots depending on whether or not they are caught by the spiders.txt - - the only thing I am not sure about is why we need to redirect in the first place. Is there any reason for this - surely its better just to present the url ?? Anyone got any comments Thanks Stuart
  14. I have the same problem - though I've installed paypalipn 4 times before and never seen this problem Any fixes?
  15. Did you get an answer for this? Thanks Stuart