This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > Webmaster forum > September 2005 > Cloaked websites
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 3:19 am |
| I'm setting up a simple web site for someone who is trying to flog
something with quite a few photos of what is being flogged etc.
I've registered a .com domain, basically to give a simple
web site name that can be spelt out over the phone easily
and put in print mag ads so its easy to enter the name.
I've done that with godaddy and am doing the setup using zoneedit.
The site is hosted on his ISP's website,
with the usual awkward name that produces.
I want to cloak the ISP's url so that simple users dont get confused
and so bookmarks work properly using the domain name.
That works fine when the zoneedit WebForward is used when the
entry isnt cloaked. Doesnt work when cloaked, the home page works
fine, but the subsidiary pages dont. The subsidiary pages are all in
folder called index_files in the Page368.htm style. When you click
on a link on the home page, you see the index_files/Page368.htm
showing in the status bar in the bottom of IE, and get a white page
with nothing on it.
Its undesirable to structure the files on the web site differently,
essentially because I want him to be able to edit the web site
and update it himself, once I have set everything up for him.
He uses Publisher, basically because he does quite a bit of work
in that already and so its easiest to use that for the web site too.
Am I forgetting something very basic in the zoneedit setup ?
| |
| Colin ® 2005-09-26, 3:19 am |
|
"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3pp654Fbi2prU1@individual.net...
> The site is hosted on his ISP's website,
> with the usual awkward name that produces.
I don't get that bit.
If he has a domain of "rodsmate.com" and he has his ISP host it, it should
be www.rodsmate.com
Has he actually delegated the domain to his ISP? I have one in the org.au
range delegated and hosted and that's how it looks.
| |
| Gregory Toomey 2005-09-26, 3:19 am |
| Rod Speed wrote:
> I'm setting up a simple web site for someone who is trying to flog
> something with quite a few photos of what is being flogged etc.
>
....
> Am I forgetting something very basic in the zoneedit setup ?
I've done similar & it never seems to work properly.
You could try the free offer from affordable host:
http://www.affordablehost.com/cpanel.shtml
You can get hosting for a few $$ per month.
gtoomey
| |
|
|
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 3:19 am |
| Colin ® <tobyjug7@yahoo.com.au> wrote
> Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
[color=darkred]
> I don't get that bit.
> If he has a domain of "rodsmate.com" and he has his ISP host it, it should be
> www.rodsmate.com
He has the free web site that his ISP provides with the usual
rather awkward url of www.ispsname.com.au/~rodsmate/
> Has he actually delegated the domain to his ISP?
No, because that aint free.
> I have one in the org.au range delegated and hosted and that's how it looks.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 3:19 am |
| Gregory Toomey <nobody@bigpond.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
> ...
[color=darkred]
> I've done similar & it never seems to work properly.
OK, it works fine if not cloaked, and thats just a minor blemish really.
> You could try the free offer from affordable host:
> http://www.affordablehost.com/cpanel.shtml
> You can get hosting for a few $$ per month.
The godaddy and zoneedit route isnt even $10US per year.
I only suggested he had a web site because he was emailing
the photos to those who rang him up and that has some real
downsides since he's still stuck on dialup.
I was really just after a simple and minimal cost was of simplifying
the web site url so it was easy to say over the phone etc and easy
for anyone to enter it from the print mag ad etc. The potential
buyers are all pretty computer illiterate basically.
| |
| Colin ® 2005-09-26, 3:19 am |
| Yep, I see now - never come across it as I have only dealt with delegated
domains.
So much to learn, so little time.
:-)
"Gregory Toomey" <nobody@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:433779e8@news.comindico.com.au...
> Colin ® wrote:
>
>
> Rod's talking about cloaking
> http://www.webreference.com/authori...gines/cloaking/
>
> gtoomey
| |
| Colin ® 2005-09-26, 3:19 am |
| Right - I took the 'hosted' to mean hosted in the paid for sense.
"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3ppc98Fbfld9U1@individual.net...
> Colin ® <tobyjug7@yahoo.com.au> wrote
>
>
>
>
> He has the free web site that his ISP provides with the usual
> rather awkward url of www.ispsname.com.au/~rodsmate/
>
>
> No, because that aint free.
>
>
>
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 6:17 am |
| Gregory Toomey <nobody@bigpond.com> wrote
> Colin wrote
[color=darkred]
> Rod's talking about cloaking
> http://www.webreference.com/authori...gines/cloaking/
Not for those reasons, I just want to keep things simple for the
pretty low level users, so they only see the domain and not the
ISP's complicated url for the web site itself, particularly with
bookmarks and if I choose to put the site somewhere else etc.
| |
| William Tasso 2005-09-26, 6:17 am |
| Writing in news:alt.websites,alt.www.webmaster,aus.computers
From the safety of the cafeteria
Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> said:
> ...
> The godaddy and zoneedit route isnt even $10US per year.
>
> I only suggested he had a web site because he was emailing
> the photos to those who rang him up and that has some real
> downsides since he's still stuck on dialup.
He could mail them the URL? possibly even use http://tinyurl.com
> I was really just after a simple and minimal cost was of simplifying
> the web site url so it was easy to say over the phone etc and easy
> for anyone to enter it from the print mag ad etc.
Well that is the benefit of having a real domain, properly hosted.
> The potential
> buyers are all pretty computer illiterate basically.
really? would you be will to share the demographic profile or other
characteristic that leads to this summary?
--
William Tasso
| |
| Oldus Fartus 2005-09-26, 6:17 am |
| Rod Speed wrote:
> Gregory Toomey <nobody@bigpond.com> wrote
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> OK, it works fine if not cloaked, and thats just a minor blemish really.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The godaddy and zoneedit route isnt even $10US per year.
>
> I only suggested he had a web site because he was emailing
> the photos to those who rang him up and that has some real
> downsides since he's still stuck on dialup.
>
> I was really just after a simple and minimal cost was of simplifying
> the web site url so it was easy to say over the phone etc and easy
> for anyone to enter it from the print mag ad etc. The potential
> buyers are all pretty computer illiterate basically.
>
>
G'day Rod
Can you setup URL Forwarding via godaddy's control panel? I used
Namecheap.com to register a couple of domain names for a friend recently
and it is quite simple to do what you want.
Basically through their control panel you setup a URL forwarding to
(say) members.iinet.net.au/~rodsmate with a redirect type of URL Frame.
I set both WWW and @ so that the url works whether typed in as
www.rodsmate.com or simply rodsmate.com
The end effect is as you require, with only the rodsmate.com appearing
in the address bar, and have had no problems with pages called from the
index page.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 6:17 am |
| William Tasso <SpamBlocked@tbdata.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> He could mail them the URL?
Nope, he can be months offline.
> possibly even use http://tinyurl.com
[color=darkred]
> Well that is the benefit of having a real domain, properly hosted.
[color=darkred]
> really? would you be will to share the demographic profile or other
> characteristic that leads to this summary?
Mostly geriatrics tearing around the country in their 'motor homes'
None of them doing much in the way of WiFi, or even cellphone
SMS either, let alone web browsing using their cellphones.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 6:17 am |
| Oldus Fartus <denisand@iiNOSPAMnet.net.au> wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
[color=darkred]
> Can you setup URL Forwarding via godaddy's control panel?
Yes.
> I used Namecheap.com to register a couple of domain names for a friend
> recently and it is quite simple to do what you want.
> Basically through their control panel you setup a URL forwarding to
> (say) members.iinet.net.au/~rodsmate with a redirect type of URL
> Frame. I set both WWW and @ so that the url works whether typed in as
> www.rodsmate.com or simply rodsmate.com
That's what I did using zoneedit and the works fine except for the cloaking.
> The end effect is as you require, with only the rodsmate.com appearing in the
> address bar, and have had no problems with pages called from the index page.
Are they in a folder under the root directory tho ? That appears
to be what breaks the cloaked WebForward with zoneedit.
| |
| William Tasso 2005-09-26, 6:17 am |
| Writing in news:alt.websites,alt.www.webmaster,aus.computers
From the safety of the cafeteria
Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> said:
> William Tasso <SpamBlocked@tbdata.com> wrote
[color=darkred]
>
>
> Mostly geriatrics tearing around the country in their 'motor homes'
hrmmm - don't think one should rely too much on that indicator - one of my
customers 'retired' over 20 years ago, and while he doesn't have a motor
home I do get calls from all corners of Northern Europe and beyond. In
addition, the mail enabled/competent members of my extended family are
aged from 8 to 80.
> None of them doing much in the way of WiFi, or even cellphone
> SMS either, let alone web browsing using their cellphones.
Well I guess those folk will be calling rather than mailing in response.
--
William Tasso
Lovely are recruiting citizens - http://citizensrequired.com/
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 6:49 pm |
| William Tasso <SpamBlocked@tbdata.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> hrmmm - don't think one should rely too much on that indicator
I dont, I'm going on what I have seen of them myself.
Not particularly PC literate, the net in spades.
There's a reason I get to fix their systems when they come unstuck.
> - one of my customers 'retired' over 20 years ago, and while he doesn't have a
> motor home I do get calls from all corners of Northern Europe and beyond.
Yeah, they move around quite a bit, but arent that net literate.
> In addition, the mail enabled/competent members of my extended family are aged
> from 8 to 80.
The thing that sees them not use that sort of thing
so much is them moving around in their motor homes.
They do use their cellphones a lot, particularly as our main
cellphone operation has free calls in an hour you nominate.
[color=darkred]
> Well I guess those folk will be calling rather than mailing in response.
Yep, which is why there is a real advantage in a simple domain
name that can be read out reliably over the phone rather than the
more clumsy url that most ISP free user websites end up with.
They do almost everything by voice on their cellphones,
essentially because of that free hour a day.
| |
| Oldus Fartus 2005-09-26, 6:49 pm |
| Rod Speed wrote:
> Oldus Fartus <denisand@iiNOSPAMnet.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Yes.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> That's what I did using zoneedit and the works fine except for the cloaking.
>
>
>
>
> Are they in a folder under the root directory tho ? That appears
> to be what breaks the cloaked WebForward with zoneedit.
>
>
Both Rod. I did have a few problems until I realised there were some
minor errors in the coding. (Am very much a beginner with html.)
What worked for me was to make sure all the references were in the
format www.rodsmate.com/adirectoryname/page1.html etc, and that I had
correctly uploaded the correct directories to the server.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 6:49 pm |
| Oldus Fartus <denisand@iiNOSPAMnet.net.au> wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
[color=darkred]
> Both Rod.
OK, I've just forwarded another of my domains
on the godaddy site, and ticked the masked box.
Hasnt propagated yet, looks like it will do what I want from what you said.
> I did have a few problems until I realised there were some
> minor errors in the coding. (Am very much a beginner with html.)
> What worked for me was to make sure all the references were in the
> format www.rodsmate.com/adirectoryname/page1.html etc, and that I had
> correctly uploaded the correct directories to the server.
OK, I did that already, with the full versions of the photos in their
own directory. Very easy to setup the pages using Publisher.
Pretty obscene html, but all that matters is that it works and
it doesnt use much of his web space, and he can fiddle with
the text etc once I have set the basic web site up for him.
| |
| Jerry Stuckle 2005-09-26, 6:49 pm |
| Rod Speed wrote:
> Oldus Fartus <denisand@iiNOSPAMnet.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> OK, I've just forwarded another of my domains
> on the godaddy site, and ticked the masked box.
>
> Hasnt propagated yet, looks like it will do what I want from what you said.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> OK, I did that already, with the full versions of the photos in their
> own directory. Very easy to setup the pages using Publisher.
> Pretty obscene html, but all that matters is that it works and
> it doesnt use much of his web space, and he can fiddle with
> the text etc once I have set the basic web site up for him.
>
>
Rod,
Is all this hassle really worth less than $5/mo? You can get paid
hosting for less than that and not have to go through all this.
Free hosting is nice. But there's a point where it's no longer "free".
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 6:49 pm |
| Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Oldus Fartus <denisand@iiNOSPAMnet.net.au> wrote:
>
>
> OK, I've just forwarded another of my domains
> on the godaddy site, and ticked the masked box.
> Hasnt propagated yet, looks like it will do what I want from what you said.
Bugger, now that its propagated, get precisely the same
result, no access to the pages that are in a directory.
godaddy calls it masked instead of cloaked.
>
[color=darkred]
> OK, I did that already, with the full versions of the photos in their
> own directory. Very easy to setup the pages using Publisher.
> Pretty obscene html, but all that matters is that it works and
> it doesnt use much of his web space, and he can fiddle with
> the text etc once I have set the basic web site up for him.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 6:49 pm |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
[color=darkred]
> Is all this hassle really worth less than $5/mo?
Trouble is that it aint my money, and its hard
to justify spending that when it works fine
except that you cant hide the ISP's messy url.
> You can get paid hosting for less than that and not have to go through all
> this.
> Free hosting is nice. But there's a point where it's no longer "free".
Sure, but its hard to justify spending much just to keep
the messy url hidden. The simple domain works fine
in all other respects and costs peanuts.
| |
| Jerry Stuckle 2005-09-26, 6:49 pm |
| Rod Speed wrote:
>
>
>
> Trouble is that it aint my money, and its hard
> to justify spending that when it works fine
> except that you cant hide the ISP's messy url.
>
No, it's one of the "penalties" of having "free" hosting. You want an
easy to remember URL instead of the "messy" one? The cost is less than
one Big Mac meal per month.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sure, but its hard to justify spending much just to keep
> the messy url hidden. The simple domain works fine
> in all other respects and costs peanuts.
>
TANSTAAFL!
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
| |
| Jollyrodgers 2005-09-26, 6:49 pm |
|
"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3ppcojFbbjfqU1@individual.net...
> Gregory Toomey <nobody@bigpond.com> wrote
>
>
>
> OK, it works fine if not cloaked, and thats just a minor blemish really.
>
>
>
> The godaddy and zoneedit route isnt even $10US per year.
>
> I only suggested he had a web site because he was emailing
> the photos to those who rang him up and that has some real
> downsides since he's still stuck on dialup.
>
> I was really just after a simple and minimal cost was of simplifying
> the web site url so it was easy to say over the phone etc and easy
> for anyone to enter it from the print mag ad etc. The potential
> buyers are all pretty computer illiterate basically.
If you free host it on tripod the url comes up like this.
http://yoursitename.tripod.com/
If that is any better.
| |
| Oldus Fartus 2005-09-26, 6:49 pm |
| Rod Speed wrote:
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Bugger, now that its propagated, get precisely the same
> result, no access to the pages that are in a directory.
>
> godaddy calls it masked instead of cloaked.
>
Dunno what to suggest then Rod. I played around tonight with a domain
name I have, and it seems to work OK when using the Namecheap URL frame
redirect. It also seems to work fine whether I refer to an image using
www.domainname.com/foldername/imagename or just as foldername/imagename
I did muck around with the different redirects though, and with a
redirect of URL Frame the long name you are trying to avoid is hidden
when clicking on any of the links on the page - even if it is to a
completely different site. With URL Redirect the long name appears in
the address bar.
Wonder if Godaddy handles redirects differently?
--
Cheers
Oldus Fartus
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 6:51 pm |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> No, it's one of the "penalties" of having "free" hosting.
Nope, it clearly can be done, the old fart is doing it fine.
> You want an easy to remember URL instead of the "messy" one?
That already works fine with domain forwarding,
for free once you have a domain.
What doesnt currently work is just the relatively minor
blemish that users of the domain url can see the
redirected url and may well bookmark that and that
will break if I choose to use a different free web site
for some reason. Quite a minor limitation when I can
always have a redirect on that first free web site if I
ever need to use a different one for more capabilitys etc.
> The cost is less than one Big Mac meal per month.
A cost which isnt necessary if I can work out how to
make the domain forwarding with cloaking/masking work.
Like all these things, it may just be a simple config
problem given that it works fine for the old fart.
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> TANSTAAFL!
There are is in fact plenty of free stuff that works just fine.
And cloaked/masked domain forwarding would work fine
if the web site didnt have the subsidiary pages in a folder.
It wouldnt take much to post process the Publisher created
web site to get rid of that. The web publishing step is a bit
much for that level of user so some automation would of
that would be handy anyway.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 6:51 pm |
| Jollyrodgers <~jollyrod~@bogpud.net.au> wrote:
> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3ppcojFbbjfqU1@individual.net...
>
> If you free host it on tripod the url comes up like this.
> http://yoursitename.tripod.com/
> If that is any better.
Yeah, its still a bit clumsy over the phone tho.
Currently it would be better to just continue to use uncloaked/unmasked
domain forwarding and just accept the fact that if I ever do move it to
a different free web site, I will have to have a redirect from the original
to the new one. Pretty minor downside to get a url thats easy to say
over the phone and easy to type from a print mag ad etc.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 6:51 pm |
| Oldus Fartus <denisand@iiNOSPAMnet.net.au> wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
[color=darkred]
> Dunno what to suggest then Rod. I played around tonight with a
> domain name I have, and it seems to work OK when using the Namecheap
> URL frame redirect. It also seems to work fine whether I refer to
> an image using www.domainname.com/foldername/imagename or just as
> foldername/imagename
> I did muck around with the different redirects though, and with a
> redirect of URL Frame the long name you are trying to avoid is hidden
> when clicking on any of the links on the page - even if it is to a
> completely different site. With URL Redirect the long name appears
> in the address bar.
That's interesting. Thats likely the difference between Namecheap
and godaddy and zoneedit. Guess I just need a free service like
zoneedit that allows that redirection of URL Frame to get what I want.
No sign of anything like that in godaddy or zoneedit.
> Wonder if Godaddy handles redirects differently?
Yeah, looks like it, both godaddy and zoneedit only have one type of
domain forwarding, with a tick box for masking/cloaking respectively.
| |
| Eric Jarvis 2005-09-26, 6:51 pm |
| Rod Speed rod_speed@yahoo.com wrote in <3ppc98Fbfld9U1@individual.net>:
> Colin ® <tobyjug7@yahoo.com.au> wrote
>
>
>
>
> He has the free web site that his ISP provides with the usual
> rather awkward url of www.ispsname.com.au/~rodsmate/
>
>
> No, because that aint free.
>
It's worth doing, it doesn't cost very much. If it's expensive to do it on
his ISP then there are many hosting companies that do web space for a
pittance. If you have ANY questions about cloaking then you shouldn't do
it for any even vaguely commercial site, it's too easy to get the domain
banned by search engines unless you really know what you are doing.
--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"I am a man of many parts, unfortunately most of
them are no longer in stock"
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 6:51 pm |
| Eric Jarvis <web@ericjarvis.co.uk> wrote
> Rod Speed rod_speed@yahoo.com wrote
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> It's worth doing, it doesn't cost very much.
Hard to justify when free uncloaked/unmasked
domain forwarding works fine except that the
user can see the url its been forwarded to.
> If it's expensive to do it on his ISP then there are many
> hosting companies that do web space for a pittance.
Again, hard to justify when the web site the ISP provides is free.
> If you have ANY questions about cloaking then you
> shouldn't do it for any even vaguely commercial site,
It isnt. Its just a way of distributing the photos easily, with
a decent web site that allows maps of his location etc.
> it's too easy to get the domain banned by search
> engines unless you really know what you are doing.
There isnt any point in bothering with search engines with this site.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 10:20 pm |
| Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Oldus Fartus <denisand@iiNOSPAMnet.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> That's interesting. Thats likely the difference between Namecheap
> and godaddy and zoneedit. Guess I just need a free service like
> zoneedit that allows that redirection of URL Frame to get what I want.
>
> No sign of anything like that in godaddy or zoneedit.
>
>
> Yeah, looks like it, both godaddy and zoneedit only have one type of
> domain forwarding, with a tick box for masking/cloaking respectively.
On further thought, dangerous business, I know, its likely that the
Publisher web site wouldnt work on your host, likely the problem
is just with how it determines the url base. When the domain forward
isnt cloaked/masked, it gets the base url fine. When the base url is
no longer available with a cloaked/masked domain forward, there is
no base url available anymore, so the relative hrefs in the html stop
working with the references to the subsidiary pages in the folder
because all the hrefs in the home page are all relative.
Doesnt work to put the base url in a BASE entity in the HEAD
section, tho that may well just be my ignorance of the basics
with relative refs. You no longer see the pics on the home
page and the links to the subsidiary pages dont work anyway.
The main problem with that theory is that the pics on the
home page work fine, even tho they are in the folder too,
and use a relative address as well. Cant see why those
work but the links to subsidiary pages dont. Maybe someone
who knows more about html than I do can explain that.
If thats all it is, it would be completely trivial to massage
the index.htm before uploading it to include the base url.
Not that much harder to massage index.htm changing all
the relative urls to absolute urls. Thats just a completely
trivial search and replace, trivial to automate.
| |
| Clockmeister 2005-09-26, 10:20 pm |
|
"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3pqtjbFbsm72U1@individual.net...
> Jollyrodgers <~jollyrod~@bogpud.net.au> wrote:
>
> Yeah, its still a bit clumsy over the phone tho.
Wrong.
> Currently it would be better to just continue to use uncloaked/unmasked
> domain forwarding and just accept the fact that if I ever do move it to
> a different free web site, I will have to have a redirect from the
original
> to the new one. Pretty minor downside to get a url thats easy to say
> over the phone and easy to type from a print mag ad etc.
>
Reams of your puerile shit flushed where it belongs.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 10:20 pm |
| Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> On further thought, dangerous business, I know, its likely that the
> Publisher web site wouldnt work on your host, likely the problem
> is just with how it determines the url base. When the domain forward
> isnt cloaked/masked, it gets the base url fine. When the base url is
> no longer available with a cloaked/masked domain forward, there is
> no base url available anymore, so the relative hrefs in the html stop
> working with the references to the subsidiary pages in the folder
> because all the hrefs in the home page are all relative.
>
> Doesnt work to put the base url in a BASE entity in the HEAD
> section, tho that may well just be my ignorance of the basics
> with relative refs. You no longer see the pics on the home
> page and the links to the subsidiary pages dont work anyway.
>
> The main problem with that theory is that the pics on the
> home page work fine, even tho they are in the folder too,
> and use a relative address as well. Cant see why those
> work but the links to subsidiary pages dont. Maybe someone
> who knows more about html than I do can explain that.
Maybe all that is is that once the htm for the subsidiary page
is loaded, it gets royally confused about its base url and all
I need to do is have a BASE in each of those as well.
> If thats all it is, it would be completely trivial to massage
> the index.htm before uploading it to include the base url.
>
> Not that much harder to massage index.htm changing all
> the relative urls to absolute urls. Thats just a completely
> trivial search and replace, trivial to automate.
| |
| Oldus Fartus 2005-09-26, 10:21 pm |
| Rod Speed wrote:
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Maybe all that is is that once the htm for the subsidiary page
> is loaded, it gets royally confused about its base url and all
> I need to do is have a BASE in each of those as well.
>
>
>
>
>
If email address is valid, check your mail Rod.
--
Cheers
Oldus Fartus
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-26, 10:21 pm |
| Oldus Fartus <denisand@iiNOSPAMnet.net.au> wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
[color=darkred]
> If email address is valid, check your mail Rod.
Yes, it is, but nothing obvious there from you.
There is a message saying that the email address has been
temporarily suspended, but that looks like a hoax email.
I've replied to your unmunged email, so that should work.
| |
| Jerry Stuckle 2005-09-26, 10:21 pm |
| Rod Speed wrote:
> Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote
>
>
>
>
> There are is in fact plenty of free stuff that works just fine.
>
Nope. Everything costs something. Maybe not money. But time is also a
cost.
> And cloaked/masked domain forwarding would work fine
> if the web site didnt have the subsidiary pages in a folder.
>
If.. Dog... Rabbit...
> It wouldnt take much to post process the Publisher created
> web site to get rid of that. The web publishing step is a bit
> much for that level of user so some automation would of
> that would be handy anyway.
>
>
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-27, 3:30 am |
| Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
> Oldus Fartus <denisand@iiNOSPAMnet.net.au> wrote
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
And it turns out to not be the problem anyway.
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> Yes, it is, but nothing obvious there from you.
> There is a message saying that the email address has been
> temporarily suspended, but that looks like a hoax email.
> I've replied to your unmunged email, so that should work.
The old fart put up a Publisher site on his web page,
and that works fine, both cloaked/masked and not.
The most obvious difference between his and mine is that his showed
a full url in the status bar when hovering over the nav links, mine just
showed a relative url in the index_files/Page386.htm format.
Noticed that you can specify in the web page setup in Publisher
whether you want all the subsidiary files in a folder, and unticked
that. That now has all the files in the root, but I still get the same
problem, the cloaked/masked url doesnt allow navigation to the
subsidiary pages, you just get a blank white screen, the
uncloaked/unmasked url works fine.
The most obvious difference between his and mine is that mine
is done with Publisher 2003 SP1 and his with Publisher 2000.
| |
|
| On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:46:09 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
scrawled:
>I was really just after a simple and minimal cost was of simplifying
>the web site url so it was easy to say over the phone etc and easy
>for anyone to enter it from the print mag ad etc. The potential
>buyers are all pretty computer illiterate basically.
When my site was in free space, before I switched to a hosting
company, I used EasyDNS and never had any trouble with them. It
worked fine and their support is excellent.
--
MGW
Information on Hurricane Assistance - http://uniquelygifted.org/katrina.htm
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-27, 3:31 am |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> Nope.
Yep.
> Everything costs something. Maybe not money. But time is also a cost.
Some choose to give it away anyway.
[color=darkred]
> If.. Dog... Rabbit...
Pathetic, really.
[color=darkred]
Its starting to look like its just some quirk of Publisher 2003
and the way the settings are configured since a different
Publisher 2000 web site allows cloaking/masking fine.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-27, 6:32 am |
| Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> And it turns out to not be the problem anyway.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The old fart put up a Publisher site on his web page,
> and that works fine, both cloaked/masked and not.
>
> The most obvious difference between his and mine is that his showed
> a full url in the status bar when hovering over the nav links, mine
> just showed a relative url in the index_files/Page386.htm format.
>
> Noticed that you can specify in the web page setup in Publisher
> whether you want all the subsidiary files in a folder, and unticked
> that. That now has all the files in the root, but I still get the same
> problem, the cloaked/masked url doesnt allow navigation to the
> subsidiary pages, you just get a blank white screen, the
> uncloaked/unmasked url works fine.
> The most obvious difference between his and mine is that mine
> is done with Publisher 2003 SP1 and his with Publisher 2000.
And the latest is that if I do a masked domain forward using
godaddy to his web site, it works fine when masked/cloaked.
So its not the domain forwarding, its some difference between
Publisher 2000 and 2003 or how the 2003 is configured.
I'll do another using Publisher 2000 myself and see how that goes.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-27, 10:21 pm |
| Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> And the latest is that if I do a masked domain forward using
> godaddy to his web site, it works fine when masked/cloaked.
>
> So its not the domain forwarding, its some difference between
> Publisher 2000 and 2003 or how the 2003 is configured.
>
> I'll do another using Publisher 2000 myself and see how that goes.
Having some problems installing 2000, the CD is corrupt.
Getting it off emule, but in the mean time have installed 2002
and get the same result as with 2003, doesnt work masked.
Oddly enough, it called the main html the same name as
the .pub file name, presumably just a config problem of
mine, but when I loaded that when I just saw the list of
files on my web area, the link on that home page
which just points to the same file I just loaded gives the
same result, it wont even load it from the link, same result
I get when loading subsidiary pages when cloaked. Thats
gotta be significant, not sure of what currently.
Looks like the problem may well be this
stuff which is at the top of the main htm
<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml"
xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<meta name=ProgId content=Publisher.Document>
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Publisher 10">
<link rel=File-List href="website_filelist.xml">
That line just above has a list of all the files and is presumably
the problem since the left end of the url isnt included and IE
gets royally confused when it cant see the base url for the web
site when the cloaking/masking prevents it from seeing that.
Presumably the 2000 web site doesnt have that in it.
Unfortunately I cant even search for "link rel=File-List"
with google, that appears to just bring up a list of sites
that happen to have that in their web page etc.
I cant stop now, real itch to know what the problem is now,
its gotta be something I'll kick myself about when I find it.
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-29, 3:25 am |
| Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:[color=darkred]
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
Turns out to be just an IE6 bug.
Works fine using Firefox.
Fully updated IE6
Version 6.0.2900.2180
Build 62900.2180
| |
| Colin ® 2005-09-29, 3:25 am |
|
"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3q1ad6FcmamkU1@individual.net...
> Turns out to be just an IE6 bug.
>
> Works fine using Firefox.
>
> Fully updated IE6
> Version 6.0.2900.2180
> Build 62900.2180
Yeh, but you are still in trouble - not much else but IE out there in the
wild. About 88% on the site I manage
| |
| Rod Speed 2005-09-29, 3:25 am |
| Colin ® <tobyjug7@yahoo.com.au> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> Yeh, but you are still in trouble
Nope.
> - not much else but IE out there in the wild. About 88% on the site I manage
Sure, but I dont have to cloak/stealth/mask the domain forward.
That was only done to allow me to move the actual web site
if I ever needed to, by just changing the domain forward.
All I have to do is to redirect if that ever become necessary.
cloaked/stealthed/masked domain forwards have another
real downside anyway, a refresh goes back to the home page.
And this only affect web sites done with Publisher 2002 and 2003
anyway, I only went that route because the owner of the web site
and domain was fluent with that. It is however very easy to use.
| |
| Charles Sweeney 2005-09-29, 6:27 pm |
| Rod Speed wrote
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
cloaked,[color=darkred]
on[color=darkred]
site[color=darkred]
minor[color=darkred]
year.[color=darkred]
of[color=darkred]
panel?[color=darkred]
names[color=darkred]
a[color=darkred]
except[color=darkred]
from[color=darkred]
with[color=darkred]
Frame[color=darkred]
or[color=darkred]
masking/cloaking[color=darkred]
>
> Turns out to be just an IE6 bug.
>
> Works fine using Firefox.
>
> Fully updated IE6
> Version 6.0.2900.2180
> Build 62900.2180
I only need two more posts now, then the "replied-to" indentations will
resemble the Empire State Building.
--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com
| |
| Damien McBain 2005-09-29, 6:27 pm |
| Charles Sweeney committed to the eternal aether...:
> Rod Speed wrote
>
> cloaked,
> on
> site
> minor
> year.
> of
> panel?
> names
> a
> except
> from
> with
> Frame
> or
> masking/cloaking
>
> I only need two more posts now, then the "replied-to" indentations will
> resemble the Empire State Building.
ASCII art!
| |
| Colin ® 2005-09-29, 10:28 pm |
| A good reason for top posting Damien :-)
You must admit, Speed is the king of non-snippers
"Damien McBain" <news@themadbomber.net> wrote in message
news:kpx88ao9uqq4.1xdsm6kqsw7er$.dlg@40tude.net...
> Charles Sweeney committed to the eternal aether...:
>
>
> ASCII art!
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|