I am pulling the content of a bunch of customer reviews from a website using a tiny piece of PHP, though the title of each review contains the URL to the original review on the website that it comes from, which is great, except that the URL that is pulled does not contain to originating websites full address.
So on my website, the link does not work. You can see it in action here:
http://www.clearpandb.co.uk/new2016/feedback.php try clicking one of the review titles.
Is there any way to fix this with CSS? I think all it needs is a prefix to the original site. What is pulled from the originating site is just e.g. "/job/view/1971050", which when clicked tries to find this on my site (obviously won't find it). So I need to prefix it with "www.mybuilder.com" so that it works.
If the above isn't possible, a last resort might be to just disable the URL (without removing the title text itself) just so that there isn't a bunch of broken links.
PHP being used:
<?php
include_once('simple_html_dom.php');
$target_url = "https://www.mybuilder.com/profile/view/clear_plumbing_and_building_ltd/feedback";
$html = new simple_html_dom();
$html->load_file($target_url);
foreach($html->find('li[class=job-view-feedback]') as $jobviewfeedback){
echo $jobviewfeedback;
}
?>
I'm using a modified version of this tutorial for this:
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/build-webcrawler-part-2
Which makes use of the a "helper" called "Simple HTML DOM".
Any help or pointers in the right direction are much appreciated, thanks in advance!
Can you edit that PHP? If so, do a PHP string replace on $jobviewfeedback... search for href="/ and replace with href="http://www.mybuilder.com/
so instead of
echo $jobviewfeedback;
you'd have
echo str_replace('href="/', 'href="http://www.mybuilder.com/', $jobviewfeedback);
Related
Is there a way of getting ride of comments on a published webpage?
I tend to over-comment my HTML code when I am working on it so I can refer back to previous code, or some test changes I made. When I publish the Website publicly, if someone uses something like Chrome-inspect to see the code, they can see all the comments there.
I want those comments hidden when Its public, but stay while I'm editing it.
So my question is, does anyone have a good way to tag/mark comments for removal once published? or some script to strip the comments clean? (And is there a risk to stripping all the comments)
you can change .html on the end of the file to .php all of the html will work the same but put the comments in something like this and they'll be hidden.
<?php
//hidden comment
//you can't see this
?>
start each line with //
i'm not sure what text editor you are using but in sublime text you can select large areas of text and hit ctrl+/ to make them all into a comment while they are in the php tag
<?php //comments ?>
My extension renders additional links on a page (that is adds some <a href='...'>...</a> to the page text (in HtmlPageLinkRendererEnd hook)).
See small arrows in https://withoutvowels.org/wiki/Tanakh:Genesis_1:1 for an example. The arrows are automatically added by my extension (sorry, at the time of writing this the source code is not yet released).
The problem is that red/blue ("new") status is not updated for links which I add.
Please explain how to make Wikipedia to update color of my links as appropriate together with regular [[...]] MediaWiki links.
My current workaround is to run php maintenance/update.php. It is a very bad workaround. How to do it better?
Normally you'd use LinkRenderer to create the links and LinkBatch to make the page existence check efficient (you don't want a separate SQL query for each link). You can't really do that in HtmlPageLinkRendererEnd since you only learn about the links one by one.
The way the parser deals with this is that it replaces links with a placeholder and collects them in a list, then after parsing is mostly done it looks them all up at once and then switches the placeholders with the rendered links. You can probably hook into somthing that happens between the two (e.g. ParserAfterParse), get the list of links from the parser and use them to build a list of your own links.
With valuable help of Wikitech-l mailing list, I found a solution.
The solution is to use ParserAfterTidy hook.
public static function onParserAfterTidy( &$parser, &$text ) {
# ...
$parserOutput = $parser->getOutput();
foreach($parserOutput->getLinks() as ...) {
# ...
$parserOutput->addLink( Title::newFromDBkey(...) );
}
}
Assume I have the following code section:
<syntaxhighlight lang = "php">
function my_func($str) {
$arr = split($str, ' ');
}
</syntaxhighlight>
This would be highlighted with the help of Geshi extension. However, I would also like to make split as a url link to the external site with documentation explaining what this function does. Is there like any way to do that in MediaWiki for the highlighted code?
Since Geshi works like the <pre> tag to display the code is displayed as typed instead of parsing it as wikicode, mediawiki can't parse anything inside it. Therefore its impossible to add a 'normal' link using wiki code.
Good news is that GeSHi already have exactly what you need!
First, you will need to set in localSettings.php:
$wgSyntaxHighlightKeywordLinks = true;
By doing that it will each function will be a link to http://www.php.net/<function name> (since your example is using php code).
If what you want is a link to somewhere else (your own site maybe), you will need to edit the 'URLS' array in $IP/SyntaxHighlight_GeSHi/geshi/geshi/php.php
(more information on GeSHi's documentation)
And if you will need links on functions for other languages other than php, just edit the according file instead. For example:
$IP/SyntaxHighlight_GeSHi/geshi/geshi/lolcode.php
I am making a Facebook-app were you can browse you and your friend's likes on a webpage that displays lots of funny pictures. The problem is that when I link to these pictures, they appear as something completly else. Like a placeholder or something. It displays correctly if it's cached (I think).
Take a look at this jsfiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/jVBSk/ . If you rightclick at the image, you get an other filename than the one in the source.
How can I avoid this, making the page display the correct images?
It seems to have some kind of hot-linking protection on it. This one's not very well made, so it's quite easy to bypass.
<?php
$file = file_get_contents($_GET['image']);
header("Content-Type: image/jpeg");
$image = imagecreatefromstring($file);
imagejpeg($image);
imagedestroy($image);
?>
Then call the script like this: script.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Fgif.artige.no%2Fstore%2F10%2F10002.jpg
The image URL has to be encoded. This can be done using urlencode() in PHP, or here's an online tool to do it: http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/dencoder/
So in HTML that'd be something like this: <img src="script.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Fgif.artige.no%2Fstore%2F10%2F10002.jpg" alt="[Image]" />
The website is checking the referrer to see if it's their domain, or not. If it's not, it's returning this "do not steal this" image. (If anyone can translate that, I'm sure that's what it's saying).
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_referrer and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referrer_spoofing.
What you do is called hot-linking and is frowned-upon by many website owners..
The problem is that you are stealing their bandwidth, and as a solution they provide a different image instead of the requested one when the requesting page is not from their own domain..
I simply want to add couple share button onto my page. And I see that people recommend different ways of doing it:
I see some articles using home?status:
<a href=”http://twitter.com/home?status=Currently reading <?php the_permalink(); ?>” title=”Click to send this page to Twitter!” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow”>Share on Twitter</a>
and some using share?url:
Tweet
What's the difference?
Your first example simply updates the status with the text you enter. The second example has a lot more functionality.
share?url supports class attributes for the anchor tag. In the anchor tag you can add things like data-related to suggest accounts the user will follow after they share the content or if you don't supply a url it will look for the current url the call is being generated from and share that. It has a lot more functionality vs the dumbed down home?status call.
find more here: https://dev.twitter.com/docs/tweet-button