Google maps api v3 default icons? [closed] - google-maps-api-3

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 1 year ago.
The community reviewed whether to reopen this question 1 year ago and left it closed:
Original close reason(s) were not resolved
Improve this question
Am I right in thinking that there's only ONE icon included in google maps, and to use anything other than that you have specify a URL for an image, and a URL for a shadow, etc etc?
Basically I'm shocked that all of the icons you can see if you create a "My Maps" map aren't available in the API. It should be as simple as saying "icon: greenPin", "icon: parking", "icon: tent", surely?
Seems bizarre that they've not included such a basic thing given how powerful the rest of the API is - why make us jump through hoops giving specific URLs to images & shadows?
Am I missing something?
At the very least where can I find a list of the official google URLs for these "built in" images, as I'm struggling even with that.
:-S

Google has refreshed the look of the icons (and other things).
The new default icon is
this one here.
Other icons with this look can be found/made here.
^(By editing that URL, you can get the icons with letters inside, other colors, different sizes, &c.)

Yes you are right, google default image is only one and if you want to another image you have to use URL.
http://www.google.com/intl/en_us/mapfiles/ms/micons/blue-dot.png
http://www.google.com/mapfiles/marker" + letter + ".png"
here you can replace the letter with any alphabet.

The list is here & hosted by google. This lists them all(or most of them) out with the url to point to them.
Remember: They work with HTTPS:// and HTTP://
Using it:
marker = new google.maps.Marker({
position: latLng, // this var would be set before calling this
map: map, // this var would be set on initiating the api
title: 'The location of the Million Dollars!',
icon: 'https://maps.google.com/mapfiles/ms/icons/green-dot.png' // This is where you put the icon url
});

Related

link with utm not tracked due to language being added to link [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
my client is sending a link to costumers across 3 countries with utm to track on google analytics. these links are send through linkedin, fb, twitter etc. something like this:
https://wwww.example.com/page?utm_source=linkedin_stem&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=lk_stem_tkt
https://www.example.com/page?utm_source=facebook_stem&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=fb_stem_tkt
however these links are not being tracked on analytics, i believe due to the language prefix being added as you enter the website, like this:
https://www.example.com/en/page
https://www.exemple.com/es/page
https://www.example.com/pt-pt/page
is there a way to track this utm's without mentioning the language prefix?
Analytics parses query parameters. It doesn't care about the path itself. However, in your examples with lang set, the utm params are missing.
So what I believe your issue is, is a trivial redirection from a url where the language is not set to a url where it's set. During the redirection, you lose your utm-params.
Most likely, the redirection kicks in before GTM has a chance to fire a pageview (utm-params have to be set just on one hit in a session), thus, the attribution is lost completely.
Now the best fix for it would be changing the redirection rule to pass query parameters to the destination url. It should be a trivial task for whoever set up the redirection in the first place. Presuming the redirection is backend-driven. There may be other fixes for GTM, but they are out of scope.

How easy is to checkout the plugins being used by a wordpress website [closed]

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I was going through a site and saw that site is developed in wordpress. However, when i land on below page. I am unable to understand whether they have used a wordpress plugin or api to develop functionality:
https://legaldesk.com/affidavits/affidavit-for-change-of-name
Above link shows me a form when I select any city and click on create agreement. It asks for my details and on the right it shows preview.
Please answer . If this question should not be asked here, please do let me know the right site on which I can ask this. I like learning new technologies.
The forms themselves seem to be from "TemplatesForm" sourceforge.net/projects/kobject/files/kobject-java/tests/tests/…
Generally, the process of finding which plugins and scripts is one of a kind of forensic detection using, on the one hand, direct links to scripts' sources, which lead to the publisher's url and on the other, class names and other names or function calls, for example, found in the HTML.
Apart from obvious signs like "Powered by WordPress" or similar lines which some sites will have clearly displayed on them, you can find out a lot from the HTML page source.
Right click your page, select "view source" and search for, for example, "plugins" in the paths you find. One plugin used here is http://codecanyon.net/item/mega-main-menu-wordpress-menu-plugin/6135125 MegaMainMenu also Woocommerce, LayerSlider http://codecanyon.net/item/layerslider-responsive-wordpress-slider-plugin-/1362246 and FlexSlider https://www.woothemes.com/flexslider/
In this case, this is the theme - http://themeforest.net/item/envor-fully-multipurpose-wordpress-theme/9251688
They are also using Visual composer WYSIWIG plugin to help build it. codecanyon.net/item/visual-composer-page-builder-for-wordpress/…
You can launch scripts in browser windows as text by clicking on links to them in the HTML itself (at your own risk but it usually pops up in the browser as text) and you will often find the licence agreement texts at the top of the script.
You can see what national language the script has traces of to establish nationality (for example the forms scripts have traces of French in their variable names, which match with those on this site) This will help to confirm if you have discovered a script which was produced in the country you expect.
You can also see what programming language is involved, to help in your search and understanding of how the site works.
Website traffic in this case is monitored by Data Sumo Me https://sumome.com/ and Google Analytics. Also the Yoast WordPress SEO plugin is used. The URLs and names here are fairly obvious in the page's HTML and in HTML comments.
The part that pops up the overlays wordpress.stackexchange.com/questions/95661/… myModalLabel is BootStrap Modal - More on Modal Popups from http://www.tutorialspoint.com/bootstrap/bootstrap_modal_plugin.htm which seemed a very clear tutorial and explained the application of modal popups well.
More on Modal dialogue boxes - there is plenty you can do with those and they have been used extensively on this site en-gb.wordpress.org/plugins/modal-dialog modal-dialog for popup dialog boxes - you may find other bits on this site, including the usual jquery, bootstrap and fonts/css.
Another script called "imageareaselect odyniec.net/projects/imgareaselect is used for selecting image areas.
As this question is a little "off topic" for Stack Overflow you should probably try on Wordpress StackExchange, wordpress.stackexchange.com though they don't actually recommend any specific plugins as a matter of policy. I am also not recommending any here, only answering your question as to what has been used here and hope that the focus on what actually makes it work will be of use and interest to programmers who read this answer.
I can't see any other ones indicated in your webpage example - there may be some I have not noticed, but this answer is also intended partly as an example of the forensic analysis processes involved in working out what powers a site, which is at least partly within the scope of StackOverflow and I hope you will be able to use it to help you complete the discovery of any I missed. This started out as a collection of comments but seemed to develop a life of its own.

links without http: like //code.jquery.com/etc [closed]

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Lately I've noticed that some sites (such as jsFiddle) and some widgets such pinterest feed widget, and many others.
They started to use links in the format
//code.jquery.com/jquery-1.9.1.js
//assets.pinterest.com/js/pinit.js
what does the // means ?
is it the same as http ?
if // is the same as http why using it instead of http ?
if both are different, can I use it to link my website ?
as addition: I'm not sure, but I think I've seem some use //name:sub.domaine.com, am I wrong ? if those exist, what do they mean ?
Edit:
as explained in an answer bellow, I can use the // notation to make my links shorter, but when I use it for my website: Chrome changes the link to: file:/// which is not what I expected
This is a protocol-relative URL. If the page which includes it uses HTTP, then it's HTTP. If the page which includes it uses HTTPS, then it uses HTTPS.
This is convenient so that you can ensure that you don't fetch insecure resources in a secure page (this causes the "mixed content" warning you might have seen), without bothering with the overhead of SSL/TLS in a page which is delivered unencrypted anyhow.
It's similar to how URLs beginning with a single / are resolved relative to the current protocol and hostname, and URLs with no leading / or scheme are resolved relative to the current page's directory.
To keep it simple: most web browsers now do not require the full [http://www] anymore. So yes, to be cool and to keep the URL's short, you can skip the full [http://www.] and just use //

Could my site being viewed in iframes hurt my SEO? [closed]

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I have studied most of the posts concerning web page being viewed in an iframe here but I was wondering if this can hurt the SEO of the framed site! I own a niece blog, lets call it mynieceblog.com and I recently found out that my web content, mynieceblog.com/mypostname.html, is viewed in an iframe by a site acting like a blog aggregator. A toolbar exists on top (has a closing button) and the url looks like aggregator.com/content/myposttitle.html The visitor can view my entire site content through this iframe and has the opportunity to visit relevant posts of other aggregated blogs. Here are my questions:
a. When a user visits mynieceblog.com/mypostname.html who gets to see visits/impressions on his google analytics?
b. Do I get incoming links from aggregator.com? Could this be possible only if the user closes down the toolbar?
c. Does this hurt the ranking of mynieceblog.com since I both see mynieceblog.com/mypostname.html and aggregator.com/content/myposttitle.html in search engine results for some keywords?
The view of my blog content through this aggregator does not hurt my site reputation. I have read that bandwidth use is an issue too! I am more concerned about my rankings and page views.
It can't harm you and probably gives you some credit. You found it yourself so it's getting traffic.
Your own Google Analytics code will be run so you will see the visitors. You can actually tell who is framing your website via the Hostname parameter in Google Analytics. Hostname seems to get set to the domain shown in the address bar.
Google does see the link but how much ranking you get from that is unknown. Somewhere between 0 and 100%! I have recently read a test where someone believed some framed content was indexed.
It cannot hurt your ranking. Worst case is that it ranks higher for a keyword so Google presents their page for you instead of yours directly.
If you're really worried about it then you could implement some JavaScript code to make your page break out of the frame. Something like this:
if (top.location != location) {
top.location.href = document.location.href;
}
If your viewer views your website through aggregator.com then surely i wont help you for SEO. For good SEO viewers needs to visit your site directly from aggregator.com
It's not a question of hurting your site reputation - it won't; however, will it benefit your site? I'm unsure, but if you get any benefit, I imagine it would be less than if your site was access directly.
As this article suggests, the SEs may be able to spider your content through the aggregator, but the aggregator won't gain from your content (framed content is rightly considered to be outside the site), and given the dynamic architecture of many aggregators, you may also not gain much/anything.
I would imagine that the you could consider exposure of your site through an aggregator could be considered an in-bound link, but it is unclear whether SEs would agree.

Remove header & footer from published Google Docs Spreadsheet [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I found javascript solution for removing gridlines on Google docs spreadsheets (using "download as HTML" and then past javascript in Web Address Bar): works great !!
javascript:var v="none",e="defaultView",o="border",m="Color",w=function(a,b){if(document[e]){if(document[e].getComputedStyle(a,null)[o+b+m]=="rgb(204, 204, 204)")a.style[o+b]=v}else if(a.currentStyle[o+b+m]=="#ccc")a.style[o+b]="none"},q=function(a){a=window.document.getElementsByTagName(a);for(var b=0;b<a.length;b++){var c=a[b];w(c,"Left");w(c,"Right");w(c,"Bottom");w(c,"Top")}};q("td");q("table");
Was wondering if it is possible to make a comparable javascript to remove the header and footer for docs "publised" to the web?!
Published spreadsheets have a
-> header: filename + sheetname;
-> footer: "Edit this page (if you have permission) – Published by Google Docs – Report Abuse – Updated automatically every 5 minutes"
-> example: TEST (I already added "&gridlines=false" to the url to remove gridlines).
Why is previous solution not sufficient ?!
I want some people to view and print the result of a spreadsheet (via publish to web) without giving them access (view) to the spreadsheet itself. Therefore they can't use "download as HTML" + your javascript, but want to provide a url to view a published site and be able to make a neat print without the Google header and footer.
Would be great if anyone could help out!
Regards,
Thankfully the layout on this page is super simple.
<div id="header">...</div>
<div id="content">...</div>
<div id="footer">...</div>
You could write a function like this to hide the header and footer.
var f = function(id)
{
document.getElementById(id).style.display = "none";
};
f("header");
f("footer");
Or the copy paste version:
javascript:var f=function(id){document.getElementById(id).style.display="none";};f("header");f("footer");
I built an app that does just this + improves the default layout. Check it out: http://gdoc.pub
You can use the range parameter to get rid of the headers and footers, as described here.

Resources