I've been implementing all the enhanced eCommerce tracks for the past few weeks and I could do most of the job successfully thanks to Simo Ahava's blog. But now I'm struggling with the internal promotion view tracking.
I choose to implement the view tracking with the concept of True View Impressions also with a base on Simo's work and for products it was ok. So I modified the customTasks from the link to track internal promotion but, for some reason, the enhanced eCommerce isn't recognizing the promoView object. But it's recognizing the promoClick (?).
I've made a test: I substitute the promoClick for a impression object and it works! So, my strong guest, it's that the problem it's really on my object. My object's format can be seen here.
And to illustrate the way the object it's being constructed:
var targetElement = {{Click Element}},
event = {{Event}},
batch = window[promoBatchVariableName],
impressions = google_tag_manager[{{Container ID}}].dataLayer.get('ecommerce.promoView.promotions'),
ecomObj = { };
if (event === 'gtm.click') {
while (!targetElement.getAttribute(promoIdAttribute) && targetElement.tagName !== 'BODY') {
targetElement = targetElement.parentElement;
}
}
var latestPromoImpression = impressions.filter(function(impression) {
return impression.id === targetElement.getAttribute(promoIdAttribute);
}).shift();
var promoImpressionsArr = batch.map(function(id) {
return impressions.filter(function(impression) {
return impression.id === id;
}).shift();
});
if (event === 'gtm.elementVisibility'){
promoImpressionsArr[maxPromoBatch - 1] = latestPromoImpression;
}
console.log(ecomObj)
ecomObj.promoView = { promotions: promoImpressionsArr};
if (event === 'gtm.click') {
ecomObj.promoClick = {
promotions: [latestPromoImpression]
};
console.log("click")
}
return {
ecommerce: ecomObj
};
}
Could someone help me with some ideas?
This answer is just to close the question! As I pointed in the comments:
" I found the problem. And it's not on my object itself only. xD The problem is the undefined elements as you pointed at the beginning of our talk. I'm waiting for the dev team to change the data-attributes of the elements on our site's pages because sometimes we don't get any individual identifier variable. So, in the meantime, I've implemented a way to get always a product id even in these cases but as the identifier doesn't exist in the CSS selector if the element has an id in the 'entrance object', the element is set as undefined. "
Related
Authenticate with Firebase with a Phone Number (JS) requires a mandatory reCAPTCHA verifier, it takes the ID of the container. For the ID of the container, I am generating a random one -
firebase_recaptcha_container: "recaptcha-container",
firebase_recaptcha_reset: function() {
if (typeof appVerifier != "undefined") {
appVerifier.reset()
appVerifier.clear()
}
let id = loadJS.firebase_recaptcha_container
let newID = loadJS.randomString(10)
$("#"+id).contents().remove()
$("#"+id).prop("id", newID)
loadJS.firebase_recaptcha_container = newID
return newID
}
then requesting for the RecaptchaVerifier and upon receiving I set this as a global variable window.appVerifier .
firebase_recaptcha: function(name_r="default") {
let promiseD = new firebase.auth.RecaptchaVerifier(name_r, {
'size': 'invisible',
'callback': function(response) {
resolve(response)
},
'expired-callback': function(r) {
console.log("expired", r)
},
'isolated' : false
});
return promiseD
},
_____________________
let container_recaptcha = $utils.firebase_recaptcha_reset()
window.appVerifier = await $utils.firebase_recaptcha(container_recaptcha)
It works totally fine for the very first time. But its a honest mistake for users not to use correct phone number. So for next time, I am doing the same thing again and getting error while generating the RecaptchaVerifier -
reCAPTCHA has already been rendered in this element
Which sadly does not make sense as the new element is totally different and also clear, reset methods were called following the documentation. I am neither using any other reCaptcha on this page. Refreshing the page might be a possible solution but that I really hate. Any insight would be helpful.
Thanks!
Finally found the solution, looks like it was a stupid mistake!
Invoking firebase.auth.RecaptchaVerifier adds new recaptcha scripts, every time! Hence all needed to be done is, calling it once, it does the rest on its own.
This won't get fixed just by implementing recaptchaVerifier.clear() method.
In the callback where you are passing this appVerifier, you'll have to implement the above clear method and add that "recaptcha-container" using ref
The below would be the element in render method:
<div ref={recaptchaWrapperRef}>
<div id="recaptcha-container"></div>
</div>
GenerateCaptcha function:
const generateRecaptcha = () => {
appVerifier = new RecaptchaVerifier(
"recaptcha-container",
{
size: "invisible",
},
authentication
);
Inside submit Callback:
if (appVerifier && recaptchaWrapperRef.current) {
appVerifier.clear();
recaptchaWrapperRef.current.innerHTML = `<div id="recaptcha-container"></div>`;
}
// Initialize new reCaptcha verifier
generateRecaptcha();
I need to add current system time into child data field.
I'm using TypeScript, but this might still give you and idea how you could do it.
My code uses the event.timestamp property to get date and time:
export const onWrite = functions.database.ref('/{databaseName}/{tableName}/{key}').onCreate((event) => {
let ref = event.data.ref;
let isCreate = event.eventType == 'providers/google.firebase.database/eventTypes/ref.create';
ref.once('value').then(e => {
// Cloud functions are sometimes executed with a delay and the record might not exist anymore.
if (e.val() === null) {
return;
}
if (isCreate) {
return ref.update({
'createdDateTime': event.timestamp
});
}
});
});
The created events for clients won't include this added data yet, only a later change event does.
I'm haven't investigated yet if this can be fixed (perhaps by making use of transaction).
I saw your image description and understood u want to add system time into firebase.
If you want to do you can do that by , like below
var fb_db=firebase.database().ref('treeName');
var key=fb_db.push().key;
var updatenode={}
updatenode[key+"\"]= new Date();
fb_db.update(updatenode).then(function(){
alert("Success")
})
I'm trying to write a script to grab Google Analytics data & add it to a Google Sheet.
When running the following code, I get the following error on the sheet:
"User does not have sufficient permissions for this profile."
Just a few quick check-box items:
Yes, I have admin permissions for the Analytics account I'm trying to access
Yes, I have admin permissions for the Google Sheet from which I'm creating the script
Yes, I've double-checked my current Google login to make sure I'm on the right account.
Here is the code:
function runDemo() {
try {
var results = getReportDataForProfile();
outputToSpreadsheet(results);
} catch(error) {
Browser.msgBox(error.message);
}
}
function getReportDataForProfile() {
var profileId = 'xxxxxxxx'; //firstProfile.getId();
var tableId = 'ga:' + profileId;
var startDate = getLastNdays(14); // 2 weeks (a fortnight) ago.
var endDate = getLastNdays(0); // Today.
var optArgs = {
'dimensions': 'ga:keyword', // Comma separated list of dimensions.
'sort': '-ga:sessions,ga:keyword', // Sort by sessions descending, then keyword.
'segment': 'dynamic::ga:isMobile==Yes', // Process only mobile traffic.
'filters': 'ga:source==google', // Display only google traffic.
'start-index': '1',
'max-results': '250' // Display the first 250 results.
};
// Make a request to the API.
var results = Analytics.Data.Ga.get(
tableId, // Table id (format ga:xxxxxx).
startDate, // Start-date (format yyyy-MM-dd).
endDate, // End-date (format yyyy-MM-dd).
'ga:sessions,ga:pageviews', // Comma seperated list of metrics.
optArgs);
if (results.getRows()) {
return results;
} else {
throw new Error('No views (profiles) found');
}
}
OK, I screwed around with this for a while and then it started working.
My best guess is I copied the property ID from Google Analytics wrong. After going back and recopying it, everything worked well.
The application shows work-shifts for certain time-period. firebaseConn.getShifts is the API-function to get the shiftData for the given time period.
versions:
firebase: 2.0.6
angularFire: 0.9.0 (confirmed with 0.8.2 also)
This is my firebase schema:
And this is the code:
.factory('watchers', function(bunch-of-dependencies) {
var unbindShifts = function() {};
var inited = false;
var shifts = {};
... some irrelevant code in between ...
function initShifts() {
unbindShifts();
shifts.object = firebaseConn.getShifts( false, from, to, $scope );
$scope.shifts = shifts.object;
shifts.object.$bindTo($scope, "shifts").then(function(unbind) {
unbindShifts = unbind;
});
}
The firebase-queries (that have worked fine before adding the unbind / bind and possibly time-based querying might cause issues too):
firebaseConn.getShifts = function(asArray, from, to, scope) {
return cacheRequest(FBURL + "shifts", asArray, [from, to]);
};
function cacheRequest(url, asArray, limits) {
var type = asArray ? "array" : "object";
var startAt = limits ? limits[0] : undefined;
var endAt = limits ? limits[1] : undefined;
var retObj, FBRef;
cached[url] = cached[url] || {};
/* If there are limits-parameters we don't cache at all atm. Since those queries should be checked differently than static urls */
if(!limits && cached[url][type]) {
FBRef = cached[url][type];
} else {
FBRef = cached[url][type] = createFBRef(url, startAt, endAt);
}
if(asArray) {
retObj = FBRef.$asArray();
} else {
retObj = FBRef.$asObject();
}
return retObj;
}
function createFBRef(resourceURL, startAt, endAt) {
var modifiedObject = $firebase( createRef( resourceURL ).orderByKey().startAt(startAt).endAt(endAt) );
return modifiedObject;
}
function createRef(resourceURL) {
return new Firebase( resourceURL );
}
Now I have located the problem to be with the query limiting. If the from and to Dates are undefined, this works without problems. But I need to be able to limit the amount of data, since loading many years of workshift-data, to show a weeks time, won't be good :).
The actual problem is not displaying and fetching the data, everything works fine, it's related to the times and re-binding.
If I do any changes to e.g. "20150115"-table. For example I add another "groups"-child there. When i unbind and rebind, the whole "20150115"-table gets deleted and this holds true only to the latest changes. If I add multiple child to different dates e.g. "20150113", "20150114", "20150115" and the latest change is in "20150115" and then I unbind + re-bind another time from firebase, all the other root-paths will stay as they are, but the latest change in "20150115" will make the whole tree deleted.
I hope I make myself clear, so for safety I try to explain it again in simpler way.
- Changes to 1. "20150113", 2. "20150114", 3. "20150115" through the app.
- Changing timeline from UI causes: unbind + re-bind
- As a side-effect the whole "20150114" tree gets deleted.
The problem is somehow related to advanced querying with orderByKey().startAt(startAt).endAt(endAt) and binding.
Also for additional info. The data which is added through the UI gets added to the firebase database, but when the re-binding happens, the data is deleted from the database. Specifically on rebind, unbinding causes no issues, if I delay rebinding with timeout.
EDIT:
I have found the source of the actual issue. After the new binding is in place and everything seems to be in order, there is an angular watch event that kicks in. The event tries to save the last change user made before re-binding.
So if I have and active timeline for december (20141201 - 20141230) and I change "20141225"-data. Then change the timeline to 20150101 - 20150130, causing unbind and rebind (or manually fetching new data). There will be an event, after the binding has been done and everything seems to be in order, trying to save 20141225 data to either the new timeline (20150101 - 20150130) or the old one, not sure which one. This causes the firebase to actually delete the whole 20141225-tree, instead of saving the data.
The new data makes it into your Firebase fine, which you can see by either checking your Firebase dashboard or by running a quick snippet like this in your browser's dev console:
new Firebase("https://firebaseurl").once('value', function(s) { console.log(s.val()); })
The data even makes it back into your application. The only problem is that Angular doesn't know that new data has arrived, so it doesn't update the view with the new data.
Normally AngularFire's $asObject and $asArray methods take care of notifying AngularJS when new data arrives from Firebase. But since you are constantly creating new queries, you'll have to take care of that yourself.
There are a few ways to signal the new data to AngularJS and I'm definitely not an expert on which one is best. But if you add $scope.$apply(); to your setDays function it works:
function setDays(ref) {
var FBRange = setFBRange(ref, from, to);
var days;
unbindDays();
days = $firebase(FBRange).$asObject();
$scope.days = days;
days.$bindTo($scope, "days").then(function(unbind) {
unbindDays = unbind;
// As a result of the new binding entry gets mysteriously deleted from firebase
});
$scope.$apply(); // Tell AngularJS about the new data, so that it updates the view
function setFBRange(ref, from, to) {
return ref.orderByKey().startAt(""+from).endAt(from + to + "");
}
}
Updated Plunkr with this change (and some others to help in debugging): http://plnkr.co/edit/YZtkzUNtjQUCcw4xb2mj?p=preview
hope my first question here is not a stupid one.
Lets say we want to build a chat application with meteor, with logedin and anonymous users. The chat should be filled like that:
var post = {
userId: user._id, // is empty if anonymous user
submitted: new Date().getTime(),
text: chat_message
});
var postId = Posts.insert(post);
The publication could looks like this to make sure that the userId is not transfered
Meteor.publish('getTheChat', function() {
return Post.find({}, {fields: {userId: false});
});
But is there a way to add a field in the returned collection dynamically?
The userId should not be published but a status like "Your_Post","another_logedin_user" or "an_anonymous_user". By having that, I could include some css, so the chat looks a little bit more like WhatsApp or iMessage.
The logic inside the publish method could be something like
if (userId == this.userId) {
status = "Your_Post";
} else if (userId != null) {
status = "another_logedin_user";
} else {
status = "an_anonymous_user";
}
You see, the publication should include different values when called from different users. Is there a way in Meteor.publish?
Thanks for any insight or suggestions
Thank you both for your ideas! But as I had to find out (just for my inward peace) how it is possible inside the publish method server sided, I came, with the help of David's link, to this solution -maybe it will help someone later:
Meteor.publish('getTheChat', function(postId) {
var currentUserId = this.userId;
var ownerUserId = Posts.findOne({'_id':postId}).userId;
var findOptions = {}; // in my final coding these differ for 'chat room owners' and 'normal users'
var transform = function(post) {
if (currentUserId && post.userId == currentUserId) {
post.userId = "posted by you";
} else if (post.userId == null) {
post.userId = "anonym posted";
} else if (post.userId == ownerUserId) {
post.userId = "posted by owner";
} else {
post.userID = "posted by another loged in";
return post;
};
var self = this;
var handle = Posts.find(findOptions).observe({
added: function (document) {
self.added('posts', document._id, transform(document));
},
changed: function (newDocument, oldDocument) {
self.changed('posts', document._id, transform(newDocument));
},
removed: function (oldDocument) {
self.removed('posts', oldDocument._id);
}
});
self.ready();
self.onStop(function(){
handle.stop();
});
By having this I am finally able to overwrite values dynamically.
It looks like you need to add a transform on your Posts collection. You can do this in your publish function (as seen here), but server-side transforms are computationally inefficient and tricky to write. Though they are necessary in cases where only the server could perform the action - e.g. signed URLs. In your case, I'd recommend a standard collection transform which is a filter applied after the documents are fetched.
Unfortunately, this kind of transform would require the userId on the client. I've never seen a case where simply publishing a id could cause a security issue. If you believe this is the case with your app, I'm very interested to know why. If you can overcome this restriction, keep reading...
You can read about transforms in the documentation on collections, and you can see an example on evented mind. Personally I like to use the collection-helpers package for this.
If you try collection-helpers, your transform could look like:
Posts.helpers({
status: function() {
if (this.userId === Meteor.userId()) {
return 'Your_Post';
} else if (this.userId != null) {
return 'another_logedin_user';
} else {
return 'an_anonymous_user';
}
}
});
And then you could use it in your template like:
{{#each posts}}
<p>{{text}} - <span class='status'>{{status}}</span></p>
{{/each}}
Of course, you can also use template helpers to achieve the same result but transforms are more easily reusable across your application.
Sadly, this has been a huge issue for me too, and I am sorry to say, it is not technically possible to just add a field on the publisher's query and use it conveniently in your view. BUT, I have a solution that may work for you. It will also give you an idea of how complex it can become as soon as you want to keep some reactive data private in Meteor.
Server side:
First, create two different publishers: one for the current user's posts, one for all the others:
Meteor.publish('getTheOthersChat', function() {
return Post.find({$ne:{userId: this.userId}}, {fields: {userId: false});
});
Meteor.publish('getTheOwnChat', function() {
return Post.find({userId: this.userId});
});
Client/router side:
Then, subscribe to both of these: what this will do is include the post's userId only when it is the own user's id. If not, it'll be undefined.
Then, we still need to identify the case "anonymously posted" vs "posted by user". For this, you can add another field during the post creation, for example is_anonymous, which you then set to true or false depending on the case if the user is logged in or not. The check would then be:
if (userId) {
status = "Your_Post";
} else if (is_anonymous === false) {
status = "another_logedin_user";
} else {
status = "an_anonymous_user";
}
This solution should work. I know, it is sad to have to come to this kind of means. It makes Meteor look clunky and impractical for tasks that should be dead easy. Such a shame for such a cool framework!