I've been stuggling all morning trying to get a multivariate test going in google website optimizer.
I've copy and pasted the header/footer code into the pages, and setup a basic page section just to see that everything is working.
When I try to validate the code its failing saying
"No sections detected on test page
TestSectionName - Unexpected or missing characters - Line: 422 Expected: </noscript>"
The silly thing is that the output is clearly there (I have used an asp literal to get around the asymetric noscript tag) and can clearly see it in the source as follows:
<script>utmx_section("TestSectionName")</script><h1>Buy This Product!</h1></noscript>
I've already tried disabling/removing the existing google analytics code in the site on the off chance that was conflicting with it with no luck.
I think there might be some incompatibility with the asp.net framework and this WSO framework. I was able to use exactly the same code saved into a raw html file with no asp.net/page content and have it validate ok.
e.g.
<html><head></head><body>
<!-- Google Website Optimizer Control Script -->
<script>
function utmx_section(){}function utmx(){}
(function(){var k='xxxxx',d=document,l=d.location,c=d.cookie;function f(n){
if(c){var i=c.indexOf(n+'=');if(i>-1){var j=c.indexOf(';',i);return c.substring(i+n.
length+1,j<0?c.length:j)}}}var x=f('__utmx'),xx=f('__utmxx'),h=l.hash;
d.write('<sc'+'ript src="'+
'http'+(l.protocol=='https:'?'s://ssl':'://www')+'.google-analytics.com'
+'/siteopt.js?v=1&utmxkey='+k+'&utmx='+(x?x:'')+'&utmxx='+(xx?xx:'')+'&utmxtime='
+new Date().valueOf()+(h?'&utmxhash='+escape(h.substr(1)):'')+
'" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></sc'+'ript>')})();
</script>
<!-- End of Google Website Optimizer Control Script -->
<script>utmx_section("TestSectionName")</script><h1>Buy This Product!</h1></noscript>
<!-- Google Website Optimizer Tracking Script -->
<script type="text/javascript">
if(typeof(_gat)!='object')document.write('<sc'+'ript src="http'+
(document.location.protocol=='https:'?'s://ssl':'://www')+
'.google-analytics.com/ga.js"></sc'+'ript>')</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
try {
var gwoTracker=_gat._getTracker("UA-xxxxx-1");
gwoTracker._trackPageview("/xxxxx/test");
}catch(err){}</script>
<!-- End of Google Website Optimizer Tracking Script -->
</body>
</html>
After all of this I am wondering if there is
a) anyone out there using asp.net with multivariate testing successfully
b) a known incompatibility with something in asp.net
c) known "donts" when it comes to coding with WSO multivariate testing
d) something really obvious I am missing?
I have used Google Website Optimizer multivariate tests on an ASP.NET website without any problem.
Have you tried putting </noscript> on its own line? I think I always put it on a blank line after the default section.
Related
I want to test whether a variant of my current homepage will perform better (reach a certain goal defined on GA), but I'm struggling to find a good solution.
Let's say the current version (Original) has sections A, B, C in that order. The other version (Variant), though, has sections in the order B, C, A. Note: the top navigation menu (linking to each section's anchor) must reflect this change.
I first considered Client-Side Experiments, which I have done in the past, but I'm worried those wouldn't look good when rendering the site: depending on loading speed, a Variant user would first see section A, and then they would see section A vanish (into the bottom of the page), while they could also notice the menu being changed.
I then considered the regular Experiment mode on Analytics, which asks me to determine two URLs to compare: the Original is my root path (e.g. http://mywebsite.xyz/) and the Variant would be something like http://mywebsite.xyz/home. But I can't orientate half of my users to this different URL - I want to test people who reach my homepage from wherever they may come.
I tried something through the Google Cloud App Engine: publishing two versions of my application, and splitting traffic 50/50 between both (cookie-based). When visiting the root path, one renders the Original, while the other renders the Variant version. Great. It works! But now Google Analytics has no idea which version it's tracking...
What I did: when the page first loads, I send an event with the version identifier as parameter, such as
ga('send', 'event', 'AB_Test', 'A');
// or
ga('send', 'event', 'AB_Test', 'B');
I suppose these would help me check the Events Flow and determine which version reaches more Event goals, but it's still not linked to an Experiment or its features.
Is there any better way to implement this? Am I missing something? It feels too complicated to do something that both the Cloud App Engine and the Analytics should help me achieve. (Thanks for reading, I know it's a huge text)
When I run this type of experiment, I typically try to leverage the API to determine the variation in the backend and then render the template appropriately.
For your current workaround, rather than sending events, I'd recommend instantiating the test on each server and manually setting the variant for each. See code below:
<!-- App 1 / Original -->
<script type="text/javascript" src="//www.google-analytics.com/cx/api.js?experiment=<EXPERIMENT ID>"></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
(function () {
cxApi.setChosenVariation(0);
}());
</script>
<!-- App 2 / Variant -->
<script type="text/javascript" src="//www.google-analytics.com/cx/api.js?experiment=<EXPERIMENT ID>"></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
(function () {
cxApi.setChosenVariation(1);
}());
</script>
I'm trying to use Google Optimise with Analytics installed by gtag.js and am getting errors in some parts of the Optimise UI but not others.
Here's what I've done:
Installed Google Analytics following the instructions "Set up Analytics tracking with gtag.js" (and confirmed it's working by using the Real-Time Preview).
Set up Google Analytics following the instructions "Deploy Optimize using Global Site Tag (gtag.js)"
Added the page-hiding snippet.
When I set up an experiment using the Chrome extension, Optimise appears to be running as Google expect - notice that there's no number shown by the exclamation mark icon in the screenshot below (there is if I remove the Optimise code), and clicking it says "no issues detected". (Also, the chrome extension's icon doesn't have any error symbol.)
However, if I then preview either the original or the variant (clicking the "screen" icon in Optimise), I get a javascript alert which says:
The Google Optimize snippet for the container with ID GTM-abcdef is not correctly installed on this page. To preview variants for this experiment, make sure the Google Optimize snippet is installed on any pages you want to test.
(I've replaced my actual container ID by "abcdef" in the above.)
And the Chrome extension icon also shows an error and a similar message when clicked (I've blacked out the experiment name here):
Here's my HTML <head> section (with IDs redacted):
I've compared the script from this with the example in "Deploy Optimize using Global Site Tag (gtag.js)" and they appear identical except that my code contains real IDs:
<head>
<meta charset="UTF-8">
<!-- Page hiding snippet (recommended) -->
<style>.async-hide { opacity: 0 !important} </style>
<script>(function(a,s,y,n,c,h,i,d,e){s.className+=' '+y;h.start=1*new Date;
h.end=i=function(){s.className=s.className.replace(RegExp(' ?'+y),'')};
(a[n]=a[n]||[]).hide=h;setTimeout(function(){i();h.end=null},c);h.timeout=c;
})(window,document.documentElement,'async-hide','dataLayer',4000,
{'GTM-zyxzyx':true});</script>
<!-- Global site tag (gtag.js) - Google Analytics -->
<script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=UA-abcdef"></script>
<script>
window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || [];
function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);}
gtag('js', new Date());
gtag('config', 'UA-abcdef', { 'optimize_id': 'GTM-zyxzyx'});
</script>
<title></title>
</head>
I've tried this against a site running locally (on Flask's webserver, port 5000) and against a site deployed onto Heroku, and behaviour is the same in both instances.
I've also tried removing the page-hiding snippet code, but that didn't help.
I've also tried actually running the experiment but always saw the original variant even when setting the alternative one to have 100% traffic, so it's not working there. (I only tried this against local site, haven't tried against the Heroku instance.)
It's worth noting that there's this line in the GA code:
function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);}
I've seen it online in that form and with the semi-colon at the end:
function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments)};
I've tried both without any effect.
What am I doing wrong here?
I don't know if this is correct, but should the hiding snippet be using the ID UA-abcdef?
If you’re using Google Tag Manager to deploy Optimize, populate the
page-hiding snippet with your Tag Manager container ID, not your
Optimize container ID. Learn more about using Optimize with a
tag-management system (from here: https://support.google.com/optimize/answer/7100284?hl=en)
I'm not sure whether deploying the code this way is classed as deploying Optimize with Google Tag Manager though. What do others think?
How can you add Application insights end-user user analytics to DocFx to track the usage of every documentation page?
The Application Insights documentation states you need to insert the JavaScript snippet listed below immediately before the closing tag, but I'm not sure if this is possible in DocFx or the best way to accomplish.
Would you need a postprocessor, or could you use a custom template?
<!--
To collect end-user usage analytics about your application,
insert the following script into each page you want to track.
Place this code immediately before the closing </head> tag,
and before any other scripts. Your first data will appear
automatically in just a few seconds.
-->
<script type="text/javascript">
var appInsights=window.appInsights||function(config){
function i(config){t[config]=function(){var
i=arguments;t.queue.push(function(){t[config].apply(t,i)})}}var t={config:config},u=document,e=window,o="script",s="AuthenticatedUserContext",h="start",c="stop",l="Track",a=l+"Event",v=l+"Page",y=u.createElement(o),r,f;y.src=config.url||"https://az416426.vo.msecnd.net/scripts/a/ai.0.js";u.getElementsByTagName(o)[0].parentNode.appendChild(y);try{t.cookie=u.cookie}catch(p){}for(t.queue=[],t.version="1.0",r=["Event","Exception","Metric","PageView","Trace","Dependency"];r.length;)i("track"+r.pop());return i("set"+s),i("clear"+s),i(h+a),i(c+a),i(h+v),i(c+v),i("flush"),config.disableExceptionTracking||(r="onerror",i("_"+r),f=e[r],e[r]=function(config,i,u,e,o){var s=f&&f(config,i,u,e,o);return s!==!0&&t["_"+r](config,i,u,e,o),s}),t
}({
instrumentationKey:"###-###-###-##"
});
window.appInsights=appInsights;
appInsights.trackPageView();
</script>
No PostProcessor is needed. You can achieve this by customizing the template. More information can be found in official tutorial or this question. You can add your code in partials/head.tmpl.partial. It will affect all the generated page.
I have a bigcommerce store. I tried to use a 3rd party tracking tool that adds some url parameters to the url for tracking. It works well on all pages, except of home page. For example
http://twigpencils.com/cloth-pencils?param=1 and same version without the param (just delete the param=1) bring me to the same page (with the url param on the relevant page).
However, when trying the same on the home page
http://twigpencils.com/?param=1 creates a 404 error vs regular home page without the param (?param=1) that works just fine.
Any idea how to fix?
Thanks
John
John, I want to help you with this but first, I see 3 issues that could be affecting the behavior you describe:
First, a Broken Meta Tag
At around line 8 of your HTMLHead.html file, your meta tag for keywords is broken:
<meta name="keywords"twig pencil,apple pencil,apple pencils,dictionary pencil,graphite,chaparral,colored pencils " />
It's missing the content= attribute. It should look like this:
<meta name="keywords" content="twig pencil,apple pencil,apple pencils,dictionary pencil,graphite,chaparral,colored pencils" />
Second, A Major Syntax Error
This error may be breaking several functions on your page.
Uncaught SyntaxError: Unexpected token < Line: 34
At around line 34 in your HTMLHead.html Panel file, a couple lines above where you placed the Google Webmaster Verification meta tag, one of your javascript tags is incomplete:
<script type="text/javascript" async defer
</script>
<meta name="google-site-verification" content="3TJvxTrq55AqFcwuo2KtEH1uUMBZPyeQ5LBnmVh8OKk" />
The problem is at the end of this line <script type="text/javascript" async defer, as its missing a closing >. The code should at least look like this:
<script type="text/javascript" async defer>
</script>
<meta name="google-site-verification" content="3TJvxTrq55AqFcwuo2KtEH1uUMBZPyeQ5LBnmVh8OKk" />
However, considering it has async defer, it leads me to believe that it was supposed to load an external script, and either someone deleted the srcattribute and also accidentally deleted the >, or some improper BC commenting or something of that nature is breaking the tag. I can help further if I saw the actual code as it is in the BC Design backend.
Third, Non-WWW or WWW
I notice that when I navigate to http://twigpencils.com/?param=1, it takes me to http://www.twigpencils.com/, which would be fine, except that when I navigate to http://twigpencils.com/cloth-pencils?param=1 it takes me to http://twigpencils.com/cloth-pencils?param=1.
This is a fairly major problem, but is fairly easy to solve.
Either you need to forward from WWW to non-WWW on your domain/hosting backend, and/or do the same on your Google Webmaster Panel, or do both.
Before we try to figure out the main problem you mentioned, you should resolve these 3 issues first as they could be affecting the behavior you describe, but are at the very least breaking many things on your site.
Let me know if this helps and if you have nay other questions.
This has to do with a broken .htaccess file, causing PHP to not correctly parse the parameters. Unfortunatly bigcommerce does not allow you to edit the .htaccess file directly.
I'd recommend checking out shopify or another platform. I've been trying to get support from bigcommerce on this for weeks, to no avail. Their support team is not very helpful.
I have been working on performance lately, and recently ran a YSlow test on my company's asp.net website. I have already set up an IIS7 rule to set expiration dates to 30 days. After researching, I think Yahoo suggests you add tags like this to your head section:
<script src="http://yui.yahooapis.com/2.9.0/build/yahoo/yahoo-min.js" ></script>
<script src="http://yui.yahooapis.com/2.9.0/build/get/get-min.js" ></script>
<script src="http://yui.yahooapis.com/2.9.0/build/yahoo-dom-event/yahoo-dom-event.js">
</script>
<script src="http://yui.yahooapis.com/2.9.0/build/imageloader/imageloader-min.js">
</script>
<script src="http://yui.yahooapis.com/2.9.0/build/cookie/cookie-min.js"></script>
If you see this link, Yahoo's recommendations on how to improve SEO, it seems as if yahoo suggests putting these .js files in your header.
Are these javascript files from yahoo something you should include in your head section? Or are they just unnecessary external .js files that will slow your site down? I just don't understand yahoo's logic behind this. Any guidance to clear this up would be greatly appreciated!
Those files are YUI version 2 (deprecated) YUI3 is the latest, if your website is not using any of these components then you're ok to remove them from HEAD section. If your website is indeed using those YUI2 files then you can get the combined version of all the links above in order to have only 1 script tag and move it to the bottom of your page next to .