Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - markham
46
Features / Re: New WYSIWYG editor..?
« on June 2nd, 2012, 09:11 PM »How many here used WordStar? I remember when that was the de facto standard for publishing houses.
47
Off-topic / Re: The Humble Indie Bundle V
« on June 2nd, 2012, 08:31 PM »
Yeah I can imagine the pandemonium. Half of Britain seems to have gone abroad for the weekend and their places taken by an influx of tourists. I'm some 8,000 miles away[1] and so am missing all that - the bad and the good. Unfortunately none of the TV stations, including the satelite are planning any coverage and all flights to Hong Kong, where they are televising the main events, were fully-booked. Oh well, hopefully my daughter has remembered to set the VCR.
When you think about it, some of the most memorable royal happenings have come at times when the country is at its lowest ebb and for a few short days, such events do raise the national morale. And pageantry is something we do rather well.
When you think about it, some of the most memorable royal happenings have come at times when the country is at its lowest ebb and for a few short days, such events do raise the national morale. And pageantry is something we do rather well.
| 1. | in the world's largest city in terms of land area |
48
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on May 31st, 2012, 05:20 PM »
Getting back to the topic :), I've found that a site by the name of live.com sets a cookie that can not be deleted. Possibly the expiry date is the reason?
49
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on May 29th, 2012, 03:43 AM »yeah .. but there more mistakes in emanuelas mod .. I posted that in the thread
50
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on May 28th, 2012, 09:45 PM »you have to exit the WriteLog() if a Guest don't have accept the ECL .. if don't do that, a lot of errors occurs because it's no session created at this time ...
51
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on May 28th, 2012, 11:51 AM »
Now I'm getting a bit confused: both Emanuele's ECL Mod and Live627 changed loadSession() to prevent cookies being set - but using different criteria[1] and yet guests are still being shown in "Who" and, where possible, what they are currently doing. This is the behaviour I believe many/most of us would prefer to retain.
That said though, I accept that the number of guests may be misleading. I have found, for instance, that not all Microsoft's bots identify themselves as such and that there may be others (even though I've added all known ones to the spider table). So that I understand the issues surrounding guests, are there any other circumstances that would make the number of guests online simply a guestimate?
That said though, I accept that the number of guests may be misleading. I have found, for instance, that not all Microsoft's bots identify themselves as such and that there may be others (even though I've added all known ones to the spider table). So that I understand the issues surrounding guests, are there any other circumstances that would make the number of guests online simply a guestimate?
| 1. | Emanuele's mod tests for the existence of the "cookie acceptance" cookie whilst Live627 (I think) tests if the session to be started is for a guest. |
52
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on May 27th, 2012, 08:30 PM »
One of the big problems with this law is the lack of precise definitions. Take "tracking cookie" as an example; what exactly does that mean? Does it mean only a cookie that is used to track your navigation along the information superhighway, or does the definition include cookies that track your movements within a given web site such as Wedge/SMF's session cookie?
I believe that clarification regarding session cookies was one of the questions Arantor asked in his so far unanswered email to ICO. But if a session cookie is classed as a tracking cookie, then surely the main SMF cookie is too.
I believe that clarification regarding session cookies was one of the questions Arantor asked in his so far unanswered email to ICO. But if a session cookie is classed as a tracking cookie, then surely the main SMF cookie is too.
53
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on May 25th, 2012, 06:34 PM »Yay we are starting to censor communication more and more. I am thinking about writing a letter to your government who set up this law and tell them they are setting a bad example for the rest of the world. This is BS that you all have to code around this just for a few that are tracking users for unjust purposes.
Don't forget that "Do Not Track" is an American 'initiative' that could well be law[1]. And aren't Facebook and Google American corporations? But for them and their ilk, none of this would be necessary! :P
| 1. | Strange isn't it, that all the later web browsers support DNT but few of them handle cookies correctly. |
54
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on May 25th, 2012, 11:49 AM »
@Ox - The BBC is using Geo-location to determine whether or not to seek cookie acceptance which better minds than mine reckon is a bit dangerous.
@Nao - I'm not suggesting that Wedge will serve GA cookies "out of the box" but someone's bound to write a plug-in for GA as there will be those who want it. And yes, Wedge.org is, or has been, definitely setting GA cookies.
@Nao - I'm not suggesting that Wedge will serve GA cookies "out of the box" but someone's bound to write a plug-in for GA as there will be those who want it. And yes, Wedge.org is, or has been, definitely setting GA cookies.
55
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on May 25th, 2012, 07:38 AM »
There is one aspect that has not been addressed at all. Many browsers are configured by their users to send a "Do Not Track" code in the request header. It should be noted that "Do Not Track" is an American initiative and may well form the basis of Cookie Laws there.
"Do Not Track" can be tested server-side by the following code:
Code: [Select]
As the default browser setting is "off" (ie DNT is not set), the user has made a conscious decision that he doesn't want to be tracked as he goes from web site to web site. Currently trackers such as Google do not honour this setting but should we do so? I ask this because a user may have a perfectly valid complaint if he has already enabled "Do Not Track", has accepted SMF Cookies and discovers that Google Analytics (or tracking cookies) have been set.
It might therefore be wise to test for DNT and not include the GA code in Subs.php when serving the page if DNT is set.
Mark
"Do Not Track" can be tested server-side by the following code:
$DoNotTrackHeader = "DNT";
$DoNotTrackValue = "1";
$phpHeader = "HTTP_" . strtoupper(str_replace("-", "_", $DoNotTrackHeader));
if((array_key_exists($phpHeader, $_SERVER)) and ($_SERVER[$phpHeader] == $DoNotTrackValue))
{
// Do Not Track is enabled
}
else
{
// Do Not Track is not enabled
}
As the default browser setting is "off" (ie DNT is not set), the user has made a conscious decision that he doesn't want to be tracked as he goes from web site to web site. Currently trackers such as Google do not honour this setting but should we do so? I ask this because a user may have a perfectly valid complaint if he has already enabled "Do Not Track", has accepted SMF Cookies and discovers that Google Analytics (or tracking cookies) have been set.
It might therefore be wise to test for DNT and not include the GA code in Subs.php when serving the page if DNT is set.
Mark
56
The Pub / Re: Some admin options required
« on May 22nd, 2012, 02:47 AM »
Like your own post?! Not so sure about that, sounds a bit narcissistic to me!
Personally I think Likes should be on a per-post basis as one could well like a particular reply without liking the topic. Alternatively a system such as I've seen on several IPB sites where you can Like the topic and thank individual contributors.
Personally I think Likes should be on a per-post basis as one could well like a particular reply without liking the topic. Alternatively a system such as I've seen on several IPB sites where you can Like the topic and thank individual contributors.
57
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on May 20th, 2012, 09:47 PM »
Depends on how you do it. I've added a small amount of code in index.template.php which tests to see if cookies have been accepted and if not, the main menu bar isn't displayed[1]. That lets spiders crawl the message content - and there's a sitemap to help them - and they can get at our (Aeva) gallery.
I *think* we're compliant - and thanks, btw, for the heads-up on Nibongo's multi-quote mod whose cookie I've now added to our list.
I *think* we're compliant - and thanks, btw, for the heads-up on Nibongo's multi-quote mod whose cookie I've now added to our list.
| 1. | Most actions are blocked in index.php by Emanuele's mod, if cookies haven't been accepted. |
58
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on May 20th, 2012, 07:36 PM »Interesting approach. Note that they're essentially saying 'you cannot use this site until you at least agree to cookie use'.
59
The Pub / Re: The Cookie Law (in the UK at least)
« on May 17th, 2012, 06:56 PM »I'm not surprised. I still haven't had an answer from the ICO and I have sent another email asking for an update.
It's not good that Government sites won't be in compliance as like the rest of us, they have had a year's grace. They really should be setting a good example.
I still think the problem can be solved in Wedge's case by a more drastic measure than previously indicated and would have a lot of beneficial effects as a consequence but the shouting that will ensue from users afterwards... I don't want to have to deal with that.
I had a quick look at the WordPress plug-in and have to question whether it is a compliant solution. Seems to rely on a third-party site with which your site must register and it simply displays a message with an "accept" button but doesn't seem to be a way for your site to determe whether a given user has accepted cookies (if so, which). I suspect it's a means of collecting marketing intelligence in disguise.
60
Other software / Re: Has SMF Gotten Slower?
« on May 16th, 2012, 07:49 AM »Interesting... what do other people think about doing that?
(For the record, I suspect that even if you do make it like that, people are going to want per-post avatars anyway, and even then it's just a toss-up being storing it per post or per board which is complicated if you then move things between boards)