I'm working on a Salesforce coding issue. Let me preface this by saying I'm not a developer or Salesforce expert.
What language is this?
Data Type FormulaThis formula references multiple objects
IF (Fulfillment_Submission_Form_URL__c <> "" && CONTAINS(Fulfillment_Submission_Form_URL__c, "qualtrics"),
Fulfillment_Submission_Form_URL__c &
(IF (CONTAINS(Fulfillment_Submission_Form_URL__c,"?SID="), "&", "?")) &
(IF (CONTAINS(TEXT(Type__c), "Site Visit"),
"ContactId="&Statement_of_Work__r.Contractor_Contact__c&
"&CoachType="&SUBSTITUTE(Statement_of_Work__r.Work_Type__r.Name," ","%20")&
"&CoachName="&SUBSTITUTE(Statement_of_Work__r.Contractor_Name__c," ","%20")&
"&InitPartId="&Initiative_Participation__r.Id&
"&InstitutionName="&substitute(substitute(SUBSTITUTE(Institution_Name__c," ","%20"),")",""),"(","")&
"&AccountId="&Initiative_Participation__r.Participating_Institution__r.Id&
"&TodaysDate="&TEXT(TODAY())&
"&SOWLineItemId="&Id&
"&LeaderCollege="&Initiative_Participation__r.ATD_Leader_College_Status__c&
"&SVRCompleted="&TEXT(Count_of_Site_Visit_Fulfillments__c)&
"&SVRRequired="&TEXT(Number_of_Work_Units_Allocated__c),
IF (CONTAINS(TEXT(Type__c), "Feedback"),
"InitPartId="&Initiative_Participation__r.Id&
"&SOWLineItemId="&Id&
"&ReportYear="&Statement_of_Work__r.SOW_Year__c&
"&UserId="&Contractor_User_Id__c&
"&InstitutionName="&substitute(substitute(SUBSTITUTE(Institution_Name__c," ","%20"),")",""),"(",""),
"")
))
,"")
Essentially it's pulling a link from another product we've integrated it with. We then take the basic link and reformat it to add parameters.
The problem is when it pulls in some parameters (ex: CoachName) the Coach entered their name in strange formats like: John (Coach) Doe.
So when the script outputs a URL that includes parameters it breaks at the &CoachName=John%20(Coach)% portion of the URL. Any easy way to work around this by modifying the script? Unfortunately we DO need that (Coach) identifier because the system we push to grabs that as well.
It's formula syntax, I'd compare it to Excel-like formulas. There's self-paced training if you don't want to read documentation. And as it's not exactly code-related you may have more luck on dedicated site, https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/. More admins lurk there.
So you do want that "(Coach)" to go through but it breaks the link? Looks like ( is a special character. It's not technically wrong to have unescaped parentheses, if it breaks that other site you might want to contact them and get their act together. RFC doesn't force us to encode them but looks like you'll have to to solve it at least in the short term: https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/78110/is-it-bad-to-use-parentheses-in-a-url
Instead of poor man's encoding (SUBSTITUTE(Statement_of_Work__r.Contractor_Name__c," ","%20") try using proper URLENCODE(Statement_of_Work__r.Contractor_Name__c).
Or there's bit more "pro" function called URLFOR but the documentation doesn't make it very clear how powerful the 3rd parameter is with the braces [key1 = value1, key2 = value2] syntax. Basically just pass the parameters and let SF worry about encoding special characters etc.
Read my answer https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/a/46445/799 and there are some examples on the net like https://support.docusign.com/s/articles/DFS-URL-buttons-for-Lightning-basic-setup-limitations?language=en_US&rsc_301
Related
I have a field in an RSS item that includes a URL such as:
https://www.facebook.com/9999249845065110
https://www.yelp.com/biz/bix-berkeley-2?hrid=TaFUhHhVrhEJdCPjaB6RUQ
https://www.google.com/search?q=hello%20Signs%20&%20Graphics&ludocid=1720220414695611454#lrd=0x0:0x17df735a614e9c3e,1
I'm trying to setup a Zap in Zapier using the Formatter tool to essentially extract the root domain without the .com. So:
facebook
yelp
google
I have no clue how to use the Formatter Extract Pattern tool though. Can't figure out the syntax.
Best case scenario, it can look at any URL and extract the name of the site (e.g. facebook/google/yelp). If that's too complicated, then I could provide a finite list of what terms to look for and have it return the first (and only) one found. So it would check if the URL contained facebook or google or yelp and if so return that name as a value.
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.
David here, from the Zapier Platform team.
This is totally possible. The input is the text you want to search (the full url) and the pattern is your regular expression.
In your case, you want to find the word between www. and .com. Use the regular expression www\.(\w+)\.com.
That worked for me, and pulled out yelp.
You can see each part of the regex explained here: https://regex101.com/r/KmwMAV/1
Let me know if you've got any other questions!
I am using Discourse forum software. As in its current state, Discourse presents links to topic in two ways, with and without a post number at the end.
Example:
forum.domain.com/t/some-topic/23
forum.domain.com/t/some-topic/23/5
The first one is what I want and the second one I want to not be displayed in the forum at all.
I've written a post about it on Discourse forum but didn't receive an answer what Regex to put in the permalink normalization input field in the admin section.
I was told that there is an option to do it using permalink normalization like so (It's an example shown in the admin under the Regex input text, I didn't write it):
permalink normalizations
Apply the following regex before matching permalinks,
for example: /(topic.)\?./\1 will strip query strings from topic routes.
Format is regex+string use \1 etc. to access captures
I don't know what Regex I should use in order to remove the numerical value of the post number from links. I need it only for topic links.
This is the routes.rb routing library and this is the permalink.rb library (I think that the permalink library should help get a better clue how to achieve this). I have no idea how to approach this, because it seems that I need some knowledge of the Discourse routing to make it work. For example, I don't understand why (topic.) is part of the regex, what does it mean, so their example doesn't help me to find a solution.
In the admin I have an input field in which I nee to put the normalization regex code.
I need help with the Regex. I need the regex to work with all topics.
Things I've tried that didn't work out:
/(\/\d+)\/\d+$/\1
/(t/[^/]+/\d+).*/\1
/(\/\d+)\/[0-9]+$/\1
/(\/\d+)\/[0-9]+/\1
/(\/\d+)\/\d+$/\1/
/(forum.domain.com(\/\w+)*\/\d+)\/\d+(?=\s|$)/\1
Note: The Permalink Normalization input field treats the character | as a separator to separate between several Regex expressions.
I think this may be the expression you are looking for to put inside de settings field:
/(t\/.*\/\d+)(\/\d+)/\1
You can see it working on Rubular.
However, the code that generates the url is not using the normalization code, so the expression is being ignored.
You could try normalizing the permalink there:
def last_post_url
url = "#{Discourse.base_uri}/t/#{slug}/#{id}/#{posts_count}"
url = Permalink.normalize_url url
url
end
I didn't truly understand your question, but if I got it right, you are saying that you want links with /some-number at the end but don't what links with /some-number/some-number at the end. If that is the case, the regex is:
forum\.domain\.com\/t\/[^0-9\/]+\/\d{1,9}$
You can replace 'forum' with your forum name and 'domain' with your domain name.
This will remove trailing "/<digits>" after another "/<digits>":
/(forum.domain.com(\/\w+)*\/\d+)\/\d+(?=\s|$)/\1
I have some easy to read URLs for finding data that belongs to a collection of record IDs that are using a comma as a delimiter.
Example:
http://www.example.com/find:1%2C2%2C3%2C4%2C5
I want to know if I change the delimiter from a comma to a period. Since periods are not a special character in a URL. That means it won't have to be encoded.
Example:
http://www.example.com/find:1.2.3.4.5
Are there any browsers (Firefox, Chrome, IE, etc) that will have a problem with that URL?
There are some related questions here on SO, but none that specific say it's a good or bad practice.
To me, that looks like a resource with an odd query string format.
If I understand correctly this would be equal to something like:
http://www.example.com/find?id=1&id=2&id=3&id=4&id=5
Since your filter is acting like a multi-select (IDs instead of search fields), that would be my guess at a standard equivalent.
Browsers should not have any issues with it, as long as the application's route mechanism handles it properly. And as long as you are not building that query-like thing with an HTML form (in which case you would need JS or some rewrites, ew!).
May I ask why not use a more standard URL and querystring? Perhaps something that includes element class (/reports/search?name=...), just to know what is being queried by find. Just curious, I knows sometimes standards don't apply.
I have a news section where the pages resolve to urls like
newsArticle.php?id=210
What I would like to do is use the title from the database to create seo friendly titles like
newsArticle/joe-goes-to-town
Any ideas how I can achieve this?
Thanks,
R.
I suggest you actually include the ID in the URL, before the title part, and ignore the title itself when routing. So your URL might become
/news/210/joe-goes-to-town
That's exactly what Stack Overflow does, and it works well. It means that the title can change without links breaking.
Obviously the exact details will depend on what platform you're using - you haven't specified - but the basic steps will be:
When generating a link, take the article title and convert it into something URL-friendly; you probably want to remove all punctuation, and you should consider accented characters etc. Bear in mind that the title won't need to be unique, because you've got the ID as well
When handling a request to anything starting with /news, take the next part of the path, parse it as an integer and load the appropriate article.
Assuming you are using PHP and can alter your source code (this is quite mandatory to get the article's title), I'd do the following:
First, you'll need to have a function (or maybe a method in an object-oriented architecture) to generate the URLs for you in your code. You'd supply the function with the article object or the article ID and it returns the friendly URL with the ID and the friendly title.
Basically function url(Article $article) => URL.
You will also need some URL rewriting rules to remove the PHP script from the URL. For Apache, refer to the mod_rewrite documentation for details (RewriteEngine, RewriteRule, RewriteCond).
As part of a web application I need an auth-code to pass as a URL parameter.
I am currently using (in Rails) :
Digest::SHA1.hexdigest((object_id + rand(255)).to_s)
Which provides long strings like :
http://myapp.com/objects/1?auth_code=833fe7bdc789dff996f5de46075dcb409b4bb4f0
However it is too long and I think I might be able to "compress" this chain using more legal characters in an URL like the whole uppercase and lowercase alphabet in addition to numbers.
Do you have a code snipplet which does just that ?
your_auth_code = Digest::SHA1.hexdigest((object_id + rand(255)).to_s)
your_shortened_code = your_auth_code.to_i(16).to_s(36)
Converts your auth_code from base 16 (hexadecimal) to base 36 which uses [0-9a-z]
Personally I'd just cut the code in two if you feel it's too long.
Courtesy of a coworker of mine:
CHARS = [*'a'..'z'] + [*'A'..'Z'] + [*0..9]
def create_token
self.token = (0..9).map { CHARS[rand(CHARS.size)] }*''
end
There's also one that uses a bunch ascii characters from range 32+, but it isn't suitable for your use case (urls) due to illegal characters, but you might want to use for password salts, etc. This one courtesy of James Buck:
Array.new(32) { 32 + rand(95) }.pack("C*")
With those two snippets you can probably customize it for your needs.
What gpaul is getting at is that hash functions are still hash functions even if they're truncated, there's just a higher chance of collision though with only 10 bits it's still quite a low rate of collision. If you look at bit.ly for instance their hashes are completely miniscule but as you noted they're using base-32 instead of base-16, it doesn't really matter that much.
What's important is for you to ask what's at risk if people collide, because even with full SHA1 there's still the chance (cryptographically impossible). If there's really not a huge danger I think you could go down to 5-10 characters.
But the question still remains of why it matters. In your emails presumably you're sending a link which people just click on correct? There may be a better option entirely if you can tell us why the url is too long.
That is correct : my app has Users which click a link on an email containing an auth code.
When the user clicks the link, he ends up on the webapp but he is not redirected. The auth code will stay in the URL bar.
Each one of my users has an auth code. What's at stake if collision occur is that two users cannot be distinguished between each other.
Thanks to your very valuable input I was able to figure out what to type in google to get info on that topic : "base 62".
So I found the base62 gem : http://github.com/jtzemp/base62
And now, my formula is :
Digest::SHA1.hexdigest((object_id + rand(255)).to_s).to_i(16).base62_encode.slice(0..10)
which gives me an auth_code like : Fw1eDr701PY
Its a good compromise. If my app conquers the world, I can still add a DB lookup to avoid duplicates but for now I will stick to it.