I inherited a Kentico 11-managed site, and taking care of it is only a small part of my responsibilities, so I'm far from being a Kentico expert even though it's been a year and a half. The site (there is only one) includes a custom Page type called Publication. The original developers created a Smart Search index on this type, which has always seemed to work fine. But there is one particular instance (at least - there could be others we haven't noticed, but as far as we've seen it's just this one) that simply does not show up in Smart Search results. If we enter any substring of its title, or even the full, exact title, as a search term, it just does not appear in the results. Other pages of the type appear as the first or second result in those circumstances.
We've tried rebuilding the index several times, and unpublishing and republishing the page, and I've compared its row in the custom table to others that are very similar, and have found nothing to explain why this might be happening. The Form and Metadata properties are identical to those of instances that are normally searchable. Where else ought we to look for a possible explanation? What might be causing just this one instance to fail to be indexed?
Related
I'm working on a Python+Gtk3 application with a fancy-looking GtkTreeView:
This is great for sighted users, but here's what Orca (the screen reader) says for a row in that tree view:
"Image, Devhelp, Collapsed, 9.2 MB"
A few problems, of course. First, it doesn't mention the checkbox for each row because I'm packing three cell renderers into a column. The three are available, but for some reason Orca doesn't mention the checkbox when it's buried that deep. Meanwhile, the image it mentions is the one on the far left, which is usually empty but sometimes a "restart required" indicator. Naturally, a blind user, much like a sighted user, couldn't care less that it is an image.
What I would like to do is to poke at the accessibility objects that describe this table in order to make them a little more helpful. Using Accerciser, I can see that these exist, but they all seem to be implemented with private, undocumented classes (like GtkTreeViewAccessible), and they don't look terribly extensible, but I'm hoping I'm wrong. Knowing that the treeview's accessible object is an AtkTable at some level, I did the following to set an accessible description for the image cell in the Backup row:
access = self.treeview_update.get_accessible()
cell_access = access.ref_at(0,0)
cell_access.set_image_description("Requires system restart")
(Orca still says "Image" after speaking the description, but I'll assume it knows what it's doing).
However, that code isn't very nice. When I call access.ref_at, I'm making particular assumptions about how GTK is mapping cell positions to rows and columns in the ATK object. I'm also limited to calling that when I first populate the tree, and I'm not sure if that is particularly sane.
So there's my problem: I would like to add accessible descriptions for my tree view cells in a nice way that won't break unexpectedly. How can I do that?
I have a problem. I have a view that is getting back no results like it should, for the context it is in. I have a list of resources (file nodes) that are associated to an organic group. For this view I use exposed filters that should only show filter options that apply to the result set.
For example, if I have only one "folder" associated with this group then I should only see one folder in the exposed filter for folders. If I have none then none should show up. The problem is that when we have none it is showing ALL the folders for the site. Same with the associated topics and other filter fields.
Currently we are using the views_hacks > views_filters_selective module to accomplish the initial filtering. But it doesn't seem to handle the case when the view has no results. And I am having trouble figuring out how (and where) to identify when it has no results so that I can just eliminate all the filter options.
Now to be a little extra honest about this, we actually copied some of the functions from the above mentioned module and improved it (for performance purposes) within a custom module we wrote. But like I said, I am having a tough time trying to identify when the view has no initial results at all.
Does anyone have any idea as to how to do this? We are running this in Drupal/Pressflow 6 with Views 3.
It turns out I just needed to set it to not empty for that field and it works fine.
Lets say I have three webpages - one for big cars, one for middle sized cars, and one for little cars.
Each page is almost identical and consists of a form where you can select to filter a list of cars by colour etc and a submit button. On the client side the only difference is the title.
On the server side the only difference is in the where clause, for example:
... where car_type = "big" and color = %s, Response.Form['color']
But how can I save myself creating three different asp scripts for each page? How do I pass around which car_type I have?
I was thinking maybe by using a query string, but the query string data will be lost when the user presses the submit button.
Thanks,
Barry
You've found one solution yourself. Might not be the best one, though. When programming you always want to minimize redundancy, to avoid code duplication, because it'll invariably become a maintenance hassle, if not nightmare. So you really want to avoid creating three identical pages with just a tiny parameter difference.
Why don't you simply create one single page containing a select menu for the type of vehicle to search for? You could attach an onselect handler using Javascript to that menu which would reload the page if that's necessary. (And it might not even be.) In some menu, you could have links pointing to this page (search.asp or whatever) containing the vehicle type like this:
search.asp?type=L
search.asp?type=M
search.asp?type=S
Just an idea. Toy around with the code and that way you'll learn a lot. ASP is an old technology but I think a very good one for learning web applications. Do read the docs to learn about the facilities it affords you to avoid duplicating code. Here's a collection of things I found useful.
One way to do this is to use the query string the first time the page is accessed and then a hidden field to pass on the car type on filtering.
I'm developing a website (using asp.net-mvc) with a SqlServer 2005 database.
I have numerous database tables which drive content pages for the site e.g. I have a table called Activity:
Activity
-----------
ID
Name
So for each activity record, there would be a corresponding 'Activity' page. The same applies for other tables e.g. Location and Person etc.
For the purposes of SEO I want to allow storing of additional info for pages such as html meta title/descritpion/keyword info, and perhaps even page content.
I'm considering two main options to do this:
1) Modify Activity, Location and Person tables to include the relevant fields to hold this additional info
or
2) Create a PageInfo table to hold all this info in the same place, then simply add a PageInfoID field to the above mentioned tables
What are the pros and cons of these approaches and are there any better ways of doing this?
(One con I can think of for option 2 is that you can't really enforce the 1:1 relationship, so you could, theoretically, have a PageInfo record used by an Activity record and a Person record.
If i may suggest.. you may be going about this SEO thing the wrong way.
Rather than trying to pack each page with additional meta-data per 'Activity' object to get better search results from the page, i think you should concentrate on simply putting the 'Activity' data into the page with clean, semantic, valid XHTML and CSS. This way, search engines will worry about finding out which part of each page is of the most importance and index/rank that accordingly.
Also, trying to add these 'page meta' objects to the domain model of your system will create all sorts of conceptual (and indeed practical) problems for your design and it will certainly be confusing to users who will struggle to understand what the importance of the difference between say an Activity Title verses a Page Title is. Let the bots figure our keywords from your content, dont try to do it yourself - this type of over-optimisation will actually end up resulting in worse page rankings than better ones.
When and why would it be a good choice to keep the view of two different sets of information on the same page, and just change what's visible depending on different parameters?
For example, an application I'm working on has three levels of users: Admin, Director and Project Manager. We have a Managers.aspx page which follows this flow of control:
If user is admin, load gridview list of directors with several simple CRUD-like properties. This includes a link for each director that, when clicked, will load a new gridview with several properties of all of the Project Managers belonging to the selected director.
If user is director, load straight to the list of Project Managers that belong to this director, in the exact fashion as described in the second half of the "if user is admin" clause".
This is all done on one Managers.aspx page. Why? What advantage does this hold? When else might this type of situation arise? Personally, this seems like a job for two separate pages. One listing the directors, and another listing the Project Managers.
Thanks in advance :)
As you pointed out, most of the logic for those two requirements is the same: get a list of users, present them in a gridview, apply simple CRUD functions. Doing this as two separate pages would require all that code to be repeated twice, and then kept in sync.
The only real difference between the two screens is which users it shws by default... That's one if-statement of difference in a pageful of code..
As stobor indicates - when you don't want to write the same code twice.
Using the one page solution, the decision about which view to display is made on that one page. If you separate the different views out to different pages, you have to make this decision every time you need to display this data. So rather than one single if/else in Managers.aspx to determine the view, you have multiple if/else statements on multiple pages which are intended to decide whether to load AdministratorManagers.aspx or DirectorManagers.aspx.
Provided your application is robust enough, and you're not doing something stupid like determining which page to show based on a querystring value, there is no real problem using one single page to display different views. In fact, many websites do this. What you don't want to do is use seperate but identical controls for each view, because then you're just going to end up with messy code. It may make sense to create custom controls called 'AdminView' and 'DirectorView' to at least allow you to think of the two views as separate entities, but you'll have to decide for yourself whether this will be a headache-saver or a waste of time.