during our initial tests with itext7, we discovered that dots are not accepted inside signature field names(itext5 never complained about that).
Unfortunately we cannot ask our customers to change the way they call signature fields inside their pdfs.
So, is there a way to bypass this behavior? And what is the reason behind this decision?
Thank you very much
AM
Related
I have seen Fix messages with a tag name and value like 7804=PSD7
But I couldn't find any reference for tag 7804 on https://www.fixtrading.org/
What could this tag mean? Is it part of a standard fix protocol or a custom tag?
Separately is there any good resource for learning about Fix protocol and its subtlety
How should one go about it? Like, are there any bookish Questions Answer things that one
could practice and learn in-depth or any open source projects that one could start
looking into or some problem one could take up and solve that could automatically lead
to understanding.
In practice, the vanilla FIX data dictionary is merely a suggestion.
The reality is that every counterparty makes custom changes to the message and field definitions ("the data dictionary"). Every single one. In a 10+ years with FIX, I've not met one that doesn't.
When writing an app using one of the QuickFIX engines, the first thing you need to do is to get ahold of their FIX interface specs, read them, and edit your FIXnn.xml data dictionary file to match. Sometimes counterparties will provide this file for you.
I just installed Paypal Smart Buttons on my website and to my surprise the Expires field does not get auto filled since it's MM/YY rather than MM/YYYY. I looked through the documentation and found nothing in regards how to change this. Has anyone managed to get around this issue?
Before:
After:
I did some research on this and found that if the attribute autocomplete="cc-exp-year" were set on the form field per Chrome's spec, it might make this field auto-complete automatically. I sent this tip PayPal's way for them to investigate as a potential bug/improvement since it'll be best to make this work for everyone.
(There might be a way to make just your browser recognize the field, but that won't help customers)
So, I have created an email signature and am testing it in Thunderbird. I am using thunderbird because they provide the easiest way of testing new signatures (just paste and go.)
However, I am finding that after I REPLY sometimes the images show up IN the email itself as
<my-image-name.gif> or sometimes they show up as
<mime-attachment.png>
This only happens on a reply, BUT it does show up this way on both the iPhone and Thunderbird.. Initially everything looks fine.
No, none of the images are missing. As mentioned, the signature looks great on initial send.
Wondering is there any meta-data info. I need to put in the beginning of the signature besides <html><body>? I think the email programs are jacking with the html in the signature. Is there a way to prevent it? Or is it something else entirely going on here?
The question I am asking is a little bit abstract, so I will try to make it more clear. There are websites where you sign up and get a signature in the format of an image. It has a general format, say a few boxes that are empty, and a logo in the middle. Now, say you gain the "Overachiever" badge, which looks like a pen. You signature is then updated, automatically, to include that pen badge in one of the blank boxes. I am completely clueless as to how to do this, and in what language to do this is, so can anyone help? I have been thinking about PHP as an option, but I do not know if that would work. Any suggestions?
You can do this with PHP (imagecreate) and for the updates in your images you can use cronjobs.
Is this for a forum? Depending on the platform, I know some hosts already have "addon's" that provide similar functionality to what you're after. (Karma addons etc.)
Maybe one of these will help? phpBB has some stuff like that.
https://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopic.php?t=2147118
http://www.concrete5.org/
If you can execute an external process, you can do this using Image Magick.
I get the following errors from the Google Rich Snippet Tool for my website http://iancrowther.co.uk/
hcard
Warning: This information will not appear as a rich snippet in search results results, because it seems to describe an organization. Google does not currently display organization information in rich snippets
Warning: At least one field must be set for Hcard.
Warning: Missing required field "name (fn)".
Im experimenting with vcard and Schema.org and am wondering if I'm missing something or the validator is playing up. I have added vcard and Schema.org markup to the body which may be causing confusion. Also, I am making the assumption I can use both methods to markup my code.
Update:
I guess with the body tag, I'm just trying to let Google discover the elements which make up the schema object within the page. I'm not sure if this is a good / bad way to approach things? However it lets my markup be free of specific blocks of markup. I guess this is open to discussion but I like the idea of having a natural flow to the content that's decorated in the background. Do you think there is any negative impact? I'm undecided.
I am in favour of the Person structure, this was a good call as this is more representative of the current site content. I am a freelance developer and as such use this page as my Organisation landing page, so I guess I have to make a stronger decision of the sites goals and tailor the content accordingly, ie Organisation or Person.
I understand that there is no immediate rich snippet gains, but im a web guy so have a keen interest in these kind of things.
With schema testing, I find it easiest to start from the most obvious problem, and try to work our way deeper from there. Note, I have zero experience with hcard, but I don't believe the error you mentioned actually has anything to do with your hcard properties.
The most obvious problem I see, is that your body tag has an itemtype of schema.org\Organization. When you set an itemtype on a dom element, you are saying that everything inside of that element is going to help describe that itemtype. Since you've placed this on your body element, you are quite literally telling Google that your entire page is about an organization.
From the content of your page, I would recommend changing that itemtype to schema.org\Person. This would seem to be a more accurate description. Once you make that change and run the scanner again, you may see more errors relating to the schema and we can work through those too (for example, you'll probably need to set familname and givenName).
With all of that said, you should know that currently there are no rich snippets that you will gain from adding this schema data. Properly setting this up on your page, is only good to do, especially since we don't know what rich snippets Google or others will expose in the future, but currently you won't see any additional rich snippets in Google search results from adding these tags. I don't want to discourage you from setting this up properly but I just want to set your expectations.