I'm updating a very old website - c.1999 - hosted at Tripod. What I can't figure out is how to do 301 redirects (or 302) on PDFs and Word DOCs there.
To the best of my knowledge I can't use rel=canonical or meta refresh with PDFs and DOCs. Tripod has mod_asis but this appears useless if I can't change mime type.
What client-side options are there for redirecting PDFs and DOCs???
DOC and PDF files can be converted to DOCX and SVG respectively, which would enable the redirect to work if they are embedded in an XHTML or HTML5 document. Here are some tools which may help:
WordDown
PDF2SVG
Related
Drupal HTML WYSIWY Filter strips "file:///" from hyperlinks even though I have allowed the HTML attribute a[*], what am I missing?
I want to open a local path \myserver\folder\file and thus I added the protocol in the link dialogue and can see in the plain text editor that the href is created properly:
test
but when I preview/save it that gets stripped and thus is not working
test
Filter Protocol module allows adding them, however, I discovered that the file URI scheme (file:\ protocol) to open remote server location is not supported on most browsers for security reasons Linking a UNC / Network drive on an html page
Unfortunately adding a browser extension isn't always a practical workaround.
I am building an app which wraps some content in html. The users will be able to download this html file and view the content (which changes dynamically based on time and a few details fetched from our servers.
I would like to know if there is any settings on browsers that can block https:// requests from file:// urls?
It works by default, I am just concerned if there is any way users can do this. (browser settings, security zones or something like that)
I believe there is no code samples required for this.
There are windows group policy settings that can block browser downloads, but I'm not aware of browser specific settings. Here are a few links:
http://www.grouppolicy.biz/2010/03/group-policy-setting-of-the-week-18-allow-file-downlaod-internet-explorer/
https://serverfault.com/questions/362974/how-can-i-disable-download-from-all-browsers-using-group-policy-for-domain-users
https://superuser.com/questions/578276/can-i-block-all-file-downloads-in-chrome
I would like to retrieve the url from all the unsecured pages on my site.
Are there tools for this?
If I've understood well the question, you need to check, by crowling your entire site, for pages alerting the user about "security" issues.
In substance you got to find if any of your site's pages contains an "HTTP:" (not HTTPS) url inside the html code, while browsing yout site on https://yoursite.com.
If this is the case, i will use wget (to locally download the "rendered" pages of the site locally) and grep (to find any http:// link inside the code) for this task, under linux.
If the site is not generated by a CMS, and you can have access to the sources, I will parse the source files to search for any "HTTP:" inside the code.
BTW, this method does not help you in checking for linked objects (images, scripts...) using unsecure SHA-1 certificates or expired ones even under https://...
Could you kindly further qualify your specific needs?
Best regards.
I have deployed an ASP.NET website on IIS 7. I was able to access my site using the URL http://**local host**/sitename.aspx and all the formatting of my pages is looking good.
But when I access the same page by using the URL http://**servername**/sitename.aspx from another system or on the same server where I have been deployed, the page formatting is not working properly.
What would be the best solution for this? Thanks
First a fall to check your Js/Css file path where you have not mention static file path with localhost name.
For more detail go to browser and browse your url and press F+12 so development tool will be open and check there for broken url.
I am not sure why you are worrying about formatting soo much. I mean formatting should not affect you much unless you use <pre> in your html.
There are ways to modify the HTTP Response Using Filters. Can you please makesure none of these filters present in your application for release mode.
Generally i use HTTP compression feature of IIS to compress my content, but in browser it looks correct to me.
I've seen a lot of dynamic website through the internet that their pages are in html or htm format . I don't get it why is that ? And how they do that ?
Just look at this website : http://www.realmadrid.com/cs/Satellite/en/Home.htm
What you see in the URL can be set at will by the people running the web site. The technique is called URL rewriting.
How
On Apache, the most popular solution to that is the mod_rewrite module.
Seeing as you've tagged ASP.NET: As far as I know, ASP.NET has only limited rewriting support out of the box. This blog entry promises a complete URL rewriting solution in ASP 2.0
Why
As for the why, there is no compelling technical reason to do this.
It's just that htm and html are the recognized standard extensions for HTML content, and many (including myself) think they simply look nicer than .php, .php5, .asp, .aspx and so on.
Also, as Adam Pope points out in his answer, this makes it less obvious which server side technology/language is used.
The .html/.htm extension has the additional effect that if you save it to disk, it is usually automatically connected with your installed browser.
Maybe (a very big maybe) there are very stupid simple client programs around that recognize that they have to parse HTML by looking at the extension. But that would be a blatant violation of rules and was hopefully last seen in 1994. Anyway, I don't think this is the case any more.
There are a number of potential reasons, these may include:
They could be trying to hide the technology they built the site with
They could be serving a cached version of a page which was written out to HTML.
They could simply perceive it to look friendlier to the user
They might be using a server-side scripting language like PHP or ASP. You can configure what file extensions get parsed by the language by editing the web server configuration files.
For example in PHP the default extension is .php but you could configure the server to use .html, that would mean any files with the .html extension could contain PHP code they would get parsed before the page is sent to the clients web browser.
This is generally not recommend as it adds an overhead and .html pages that don't have any PHP would be parsed by the PHP engine anyway which is slower then serving pages direct to the browser.
The other way would be to use some form of URL rewriting. See URL Rewriting in ASP.NET
Another reason is SEO(Search engine optimization). Many search engines like html pages and many guys（I mean some SEO specialists) think the html can improve the rank of their content in search engine.
One possibility is just historical reasons. Pages that started static, now are generated dynamically, but sites don't want to break old customer's favorites.
They keep some pages as html because their content is not supposed to change frequently or not at all.
But you should also keep in mind the fact that some sites are dynamic but they change the page extention to html but original page remains same eg php or aspx, etc using htaccess or some frameworks like codeigniter etc.