itiab
Forum Replies Created
-
Forum: Requests and Feedback
In reply to: Editor 5 nightmare@steveash is correct.
Use this table in an html page, copy it and paste it into a classic editor and copy it into a new editor. New editor is broken for tables with empty cells.
<html> <body> <table> <tr> <td>Column 1</td> <td>Column 2</td> <td>Column 3</td> <td>Column 4</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Column 1</td> <td></td> <td>Column 3</td> <td>Column 4</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Column 1</td> <td>Column 2</td> <td></td> <td>Column 4</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Column 1</td> <td>Column 2</td> <td>Column 3</td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Column 1</td> <td>Column 2</td> <td>Column 3</td> <td>Column 4</td> </tr> </table> </body> </html>Resolved. Question asked and answered.
I’ve been impressed with support so far. Was just curious owing to the reference. Thanks
shaneForum: Fixing WordPress
In reply to: Theme updating from invalid theme sourceThank you for your reply. I was going mad trying to find where the code might be but it looks like I missed the obvious trying to work it out
- This reply was modified 6 years, 7 months ago by itiab.
There is no SEO advantage to having both. google sees both and in fact directs to register your www, non www and https and non http
Also some devices add www in front – it’s a PITA but microsoft especially have been chronic at adding things in. Firefox is not beyond doing that either.
Thirdly often one site will have multiple names. google knows they are the same site as the links in the page headers let it know what canonical you value and use.In NZ we were traditionally using *.co.nz as site names but then they decided to allow the dropping of the .co and just go .nz. this meant cyber squatters would try to take the *.nz and sit on it. So many sites are optimised for .nz and .co.nz
similarly we have close relationships with Australia so a CName of .com.au to a .co.nz is not unusual. However by using the correct tags in the header and adding google search and GA into the site, you provide all the info Google needs to know they are one and the same and which one to prefer.
The ww3 consortium recommends redirecting from naked domain example.co.nz to https://www.example.co.nz but as people type all sorts of muck into the address bar and search getting it right is important and it is more likely to be right if they can find example.co.nz and https://www.example.co.nz
Officially I would like it to be postbox.net.nz but we also allow https://www.postbox.net.nz to work – as there are a number of people or systems that love slapping the www. on the front – legacy practice but it is a good idea to manage that.
The difference is that one of them shows images in the posts and post category (scroll down the home page) and the other doesn’t.
e.g
See https://www.postbox.net.nz/2018/03/11/test-two/
and https://postbox.net.nz/2018/03/11/test-two/shane
- This reply was modified 6 years, 8 months ago by itiab. Reason: bad spelling
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Bootstrap for Contact Form 7] Not working with really simple captchaHere is my experience of it.
Hi,
We are using the following plug ins to help style Contact form 7. The really simple captcha causes a fatal error – stopping the serving of a page. deactivating the RSC plugin allows us to work again. The error seems to be caused by bootstrap for Contact form 7.Details below.
Plug ins deployed:
******************Bootstrap for Contact Form 7 v 1.4.2 (https://en-nz.www.ads-software.com/plugins/bootstrap-for-contact-form-7/)
Contact Form 7 V4.7 or 4.8 – both failed.
Really Simple CAPTCHA Version 2 and previous version.Error Message:
**************
Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Call to undefined function wpcf7_captcha_shortcode_handler() in C:\xampp\htdocs\heatstore\wp-content\plugins\bootstrap-for-contact-form-7\modules\really-simple-captcha.php:100 Stack trace: #0 C:\xampp\htdocs\heatstore\wp-content\plugins\contact-form-7\includes\form-tags-manager.php(326): cf7bs_captcha_shortcode_handler(Object(WPCF7_FormTag)) #1 C:\xampp\htdocs\heatstore\wp-content\plugins\contact-form-7\includes\form-tags-manager.php(256): WPCF7_FormTagsManager->scan_callback(Array, true) #2 [internal function]: WPCF7_FormTagsManager->replace_callback(Array) #3 C:\xampp\htdocs\heatstore\wp-content\plugins\contact-form-7\includes\form-tags-manager.php(183): preg_replace_callback(‘/(\\[?)\\[(respon…’, Array, ‘[text* txt-full…’) #4 C:\xampp\htdocs\heatstore\wp-content\plugins\contact-form-7\includes\form-tags-manager.php(166): WPCF7_FormTagsManager->scan(‘[text* txt-full…’, true) #5 C:\xampp\htdocs\heatstore\wp-content\plugins\contact-form-7\includes\contact-form.php(552): WPCF7_FormTagsMan in C:\xampp\htdocs\heatstore\wp-content\plugins\bootstrap-for-contact-form-7\modules\really-simple-captcha.php on line 100- This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by itiab.
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Contact Form 7 - Dynamic Text Extension] How to make dynamic field readonly?I’l like to +1 @7107digitals suggestion.
Your FAQ / instructions say there is a read only tick box option – but none is there. Either adding the readonly tag instruction in the FAQ / instructions or a tick box would tidy up a small hole in what is a great product.
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Contact Form 7 - Dynamic Text Extension] dynamictext as placeholderI find it already does – however i’m also using the bootstrap for CF7 plug in as well so it may be affecting that for me.
If it is so bad why did you boost their ratings with 5 stars?
Ditto.
Purchased the full pack, installed it on a cleanly installed WordPress site, no other add-ins, didn’t work.
Did a blow by blow help request detailing all the steps I took, got a canned response. (I do software testing as a job so know how to write an error report including all steps, commands, full error results etc).Returned their message pointing out they were asking questions I had already covered off in my description and then re-gave my information.
Got another Bs response telling me to go to my provider (I am my own provider and run several hundred WP sites on dozens of servers that we manage).
No further help.
A waste of several hundred dollars.
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Apocalypse Meow] Suggested Additions To The add-inI personally go for a 750 / 640 model. Why give universal access if it is not required – it is just begging for exploitation.
I like the approach blackviper takes in his Registry / Service settings for windows 7 / 8 / 8.1 etc. ( https://www.blackviper.com/service-configurations/black-vipers-windows-7-service-pack-1-service-configurations/) He has Safe, Tweaked and Bare bones settings.
Maybe the settings can be :
1 – Safe as houses – bog standard.
2 – Tighter – But still reasonably safe in most situations
3 – Bleeding edge / Paranoid. User beware.Maybe two to three sets – locking down .htaccess, .htpassword, wp-config, Uploads folders, wp-includes, Themes folders.
The tightly locked down version might have an untighten / relax settings option to upload new files then lock down again.
My 2c worth. ??
Shane