In DSTU1, web categories were used for tags and security tags and (in one of Ewout's connectathon presentations) for profiles.
However, in DSTU2 (May Ballot) I can only find a reference on one of the security tag pages.
Question is: are Web Categories still expected, or has their use be replaced by the meta element?
According to Marten, $meta replaces categories. http://thefhirplace.com/2015/03/17/metadata-in-fhir/
Related
I'm building a new website in ASP.NET Core MVC, using version 3.1. One of my requirements is to offer a products catalogue, where items can be grouped into categories, sub categories, sub sub categories, and so on.
These categories should be represented in URLs in a user-friendly way, and should be nestable. For example, I would like to use the following URL pattern for categories and subcategories:
site/catalog/fashion.html
site/catalog/fashion/men.html
site/catalog/fashion/men/summer-wear.html
site/catalog/fashion/men/summer-wear/jeans.html
Once the "blue shorts" item has been chosen from the category/subcategory view, I'd like to have the following URL structure in place:
site/catalog/fashion/men/summer-wear/jeans/blue-shorts.html
I'm currently reading up on how routing is supposed to work in MVC, but it's doing my head in. There's a lot of information out there and I'm not quite sure which would be the right approach for my requirements.
How do I go about setting up routes which allow me to have an unlimited level of categories?
Using MapDynamicControllerRoute and the DynamicRouteValueTransformer, it's possible to intercept the routing request and dynamically adapt which controller/action combination is being invoked by the framework.
Blog post detailing this:
https://www.strathweb.com/2019/08/dynamic-controller-routing-in-asp-net-core-3-0/
Sample code here:
https://github.com/filipw/Strathweb.Samples.DynamicControllerRouting
I am working with Jekyll to create a website that display two categories of pages, A and B, each category has multiple entries:
example.com/categoryA/categoryA_item-1
I tried to approach it using collections but they do not appear to support categories in the YAML Front/Markdown, pages will not be practical and blog forces the user to prepend a date to the start of the file name.
Blog seems the most practical but since it is not a blog post it won't behave as I wish it to. Is there any workaround?
Thanks!
I'm building a custom extension which is based on modified version of com_weblinks extension and there's one thing, that i simply cannot figure out.
Joomla 3 supports Tags functionality, I've followed this guide (http://docs.joomla.org/J3.2:Using_Tags_in_an_Extension) to create my own content type in #__content_types, also joomla model, joomla xml form and JTable structure are the same as in com_weblinks.
It works fine in com_weblinks, but in my extension it simply doesn't store any tags. After hours of research I've managed to find out, that in my extension JTable class doesn't find any Observers in method JTable::store. In other words $this->_observers is an empty object and in com_weblinks it returns Tags observer object.
I wasn't able to find, any differences, which causes to load observers in weblinks table, and skip them in my table.
Any ideas would be highly appreaciated.
Based on the following example URL structure:
mysite.com/mypage.aspx?a=red&b=green&c=blue
Pages in the application use ASP.net user controls and some of these controls build a query string. To prevent duplicate keys being created e.g. &pid=12&pid=10, I am researching methods of rewriting the URL:
a)
mysite.com/mypage.aspx/red/green/blue
b)
mysite.com/mypage.aspx?controlname=a,red|b,green|c,blue
Pages using this structure would be publishing content that I would like to get indexed and ranked - articles and products (8,000 products to start, with thousands more being added later)
My gut instinct tells me to go with the first method, but would it would be overkill to add all that infrastructure if the second method will accomplish my goal of getting pages indexed AND ranked.
So my question, looking at the pro's and con's, Google Ranking, time to implement etc. which method should I use?
Thanks!
From an SEO perspective you want to try and avoid the querystring, so getting it into the URL and a short form URL is going to get you a better "bang for the buck" on the implementation side of things.
Therefore, I'd recommend the first.
Why don't use MVC pattern, this way all your link will be SEO ready. Check here, you will find what is MVC and also some implementation in .net!
You can easily make SEO-friendly URLs with the help of Helicon Ape (the software which allows having basic Apache functionality on your IIS server). You'll need mod_rewrite I guess.
If you get interested, I can help you with the rules.
Can you explain in more detail your current architecture and what the parameters all mean? There's nothing really wrong with query strings if it's truly dynamic content. Rewriting ?a=red&b=green&c=blue to /red/green/blue is kinda pointless and it's unclear from the URL what might be on the page.
The key is to simplify as much as possible. Split the site into categories and give each "entity" one URL.
For example, if you are selling products, use one URL per product, with keywords in the URL - e.g. mysite.com/products/red-widget or mysite.com/products/12-red-widget if you need the product ID.
I what to record all my website searches with google analytics but the problem is my search links look like this
**www.mywebsite.com/search/category/your+query+here**
From what i found out i must give GA the query parameter (mywebsite.com/search.php?q=your+query+here) but i have none (and don't want any).
Is there a way to rewrite the URL with a google analytics filter? If yes how.
Yes, you can create a custom filter that rewrites URL /search/<category>/<query> to ?q=<query>&c=<category>.
Go to Analytics Settings › Filter Manager, and click Add Filter. Choose Custom Filter in the Filter Type drop-down list, select Search and Replace radio button, and then set two Request URI fields with the corresponding values. For further details, see ’How do I create a filter?’ page in Google Analytics Help Center.
Keep in mind! Since past visitor data cannot be reprocessed, always keep a ’raw’ profile that you do not apply filters against. For further details, see chapter ’Best Practices for Filters & Profiles’ in presentation ’Filters in Google Analytics’.
Site Search is processed BEFORE Filters are applied.
I went through a week of testing to realize this. Yes, the Filter logic is correct, but as of Nov 1, 2009 this will not work with Site Search.
We accomplished this by appeding the ?search= parameter to the page URI in the GA script. Then we strip search params in the Profile Settings and we get the pure URI's in the content section as well as the Searches tracked in Site Search.
I know this is old, but to expand on the prev accepted answer, use a 'virtual url' in the _trackPageview call, so for www.mywebsite.com/search/category/your+query+here have
gat._trackPageview( "/search/content/your+query+here?query=your+query+here&cat=category" )
This means that URLs won't be changed, so everything else works (as noted in the previous answer) - if you really want to you could remove the search params, but unless you're running into a URL limit I'd probably prefer to keep them present so they can be seen in the content reports.