Let me add one more thing. What if the data (about the user) only appears say 2 or 4 weeks after a download.
Basically I want to release the username data (of the person who downloaded the attachment) at a later date to prevent immediate contact by the owner of the attachment (which is considered rude in the industry I'm considering wsnlinks for). It seems like a an if/then statement might handle that. "IF the date of download is X THEN produce username/link"?
Does that add more to the quote or can I use the above situation to handle it?
I forgot one addition to the quote. I would also like the owner of the attachment to know which users visited their details page (the link details page with the attachment)...but NOT give away the username's info. I wouldn't link to the username's member page, just a text link so they know that so and so is visiting. I know that you can turn on who is visiting what page, but it isn't recording who visited what page. The owner of the link/attachment would only be able to see his/her stats for that page, not the public.
It would take considerably longer to do that. For the simple case previously described, I'd simply add a 'downloadingmembers' field in the attachments table and append the username to it at download. Now, to keep track of when the download took place, it'll require either packing time data into the field or adding another table to store download details. It also makes the display end much more complicated, instead of just putting the template variable in the template there now has to be a function to create an associative array of names and times, iterate that and output only the ones meeting a data threshold which itself will require a setting be added for the admin to specify it. I'll double the estimate to 6 hours.
I forgot one addition to the quote. I would also like the owner of the attachment to know which users visited their details page (the link details page with the attachment)...but NOT give away the username's info. I wouldn't link to the username's member page, just a text link so they know that so and so is visiting. I know that you can turn on who is visiting what page, but it isn't recording who visited what page. The owner of the link/attachment would only be able to see his/her stats for that page, not the public.
Admin Panel -> Settings -> Links -> "Track names of those members who've viewed each link and thread?". Does what you're requesting differ from this?
Since you keep adding stuff maybe a whole new generic tracking system would address the general point better. A table recording the first and last times any visitor who's a registered member visited various pages (presuming you don't need any middle times). Toplists could pull data out of that.
Okay let's refine the quote in the simplest of terms for clarification.
----------------
1)Link submitters receive data (username linked to profile) on which users: --- a)visited their page (every instance) --- b)downloaded their attachment --- c)data is spoon fed to link owners via their member home area (another tab under options)**
"Admin Panel -> Settings -> Links -> "Track names of those members who've viewed each link and thread?". Does what you're requesting differ from this? "
If this info can be released to linkowners, then YES, that's the idea for visitation tracking, I'd just be adding more data (who downloaded the attachment). If that already exists for admins only, can it be tweaked for users for ?
**Data is displayed as a table with headers like: Link title, visitation or download, date of download, username of person who downloaded or visited. It would also be prudent to be able to sort this data by 'Link title' or 'date of download/visitation' or "download versus visitation" or 'by username'.
-----------------
I've backed down on the time release of data issue because that's too complicated for my pocket book.
Any data can be released to the people of your choice with template conditionals. To show a piece of data to the owner of a link, use <IF {THISMEMBERISREGISTERED} and {THISMEMBERID} is {LINKOWNERID}>stuff</IF>
1)Link submitters receive data (username linked to profile) on which users:
You seem to be contradicting yourself because you just finished explaining in the previous post why you didn't want usernames linked to profiles.
--- a)visited their page (every instance)
Already there, so no part of the project unless you want me to do the template customization.
--- b)downloaded their attachment
With the time data removed, this is back down to 3 hours (or less).
--- c)data is spoon fed to link owners via their member home area (another tab under options)**
Presumably that's just a toplist of their owned links, like the one already present in the member home.
If you'll be doing all the template stuff and all I'm doing is providing the template variable {ATTACHDOWNLOADINGMEMBERS} which shows the list, I can revise the estimate down to 1-2 hours.
Sorry, didn't mean to seem like I was contradicting myself. I re-evaluated my needs over the past two days and restructured my new needs above.(1 a-c)
As of now, I DO want link owners to see profiles of users that download their attachments or visit their page, but I want the choice to remove the link if necessary and only mention the username (no html link to profile, just the username). That seems like something I could edit in the template later.
1a) I may need your help with the template programming, but I'll try it first and let you know if it's too complicated.
1c) what I think I meant was it's a table with all the visitation stats and download stats and accessible via the members home page as a choice in the options column. I think we're on the same page here.
So does the quote stand at 1-2 hours still? I'm closer to my financial goal of saving up.
You're sure you mean the "hide" option currently on the edit comment page? It's the same effect really as soft-deleting (the only reason the option exists, I think, is that soft-deleting didn't exist when the hide option was added there).
I could give full edit access to the owner for comments on their listings relatively easily -- 1-2 hours. To give them only hide access without the rest of the edit comment page becomes more complicated, I suppose it'd require putting up a custom template that has only the 'hide' option and none of the rest... estimate 2 hours.
I want member A, who is owner of link A to be able to hide any comment attached to link A regardless if member B owns the comment, but only for link A or any link owned by member A
And for the sake of clarification I know that a member can own a link, yet there's a link owner field in the link details form. I will not be using that. All members own their links and they can't assign a link to another owner using that link owner email field.
I hope that's clear.
Also: this may be a wrench in the fire, but if I use a custom attachment field for say an audio file or an image, will that F up the quote for the attachment download stats request? The stats are only needed for the attachment field that comes with wsn. Any custom fields could be ignored for the stats. I'm getting requests to add images and/or audio files to the link details page and if it will muck up the quote I had to make sure you knew.
I think I'll move to email because I bet if I'm more specific with my project, it will give you a bigger picture. Also we have that other quote to work on which is almost ready to go re:my client's.
I want member A, who is owner of link A to be able to hide any comment attached to link A regardless if member B owns the comment, but only for link A or any link owned by member A
I gave you two options for ways I can enable that, one giving extra privileges along with it. I'm just going to assume option B without clarification.
And for the sake of clarification I know that a member can own a link, yet there's a link owner field in the link details form. I will not be using that.
This isn't clarifying, it's extremely confusing, but I'll ignore it except to say that the link owner field is the member who owns the link... but this appears to have absolutely nothing to do with anything we were talking about.
Also: this may be a wrench in the fire, but if I use a custom attachment field for say an audio file or an image, will that F up the quote for the attachment download stats request? The stats are only needed for the attachment field that comes with wsn. Any custom fields could be ignored for the stats.
If the custom file fields can be ignored, then it won't take any extra time. Do the custom file fields have to be ignored? I can go either way in the same time, but it'd be a little conceptually cleaner to me to count them instead of exclude them.
0/5
1
2
3
4
5
Sorry, you don't have permission to post posts. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.
Comments on Track File attachment downloads by membe
Forum Regular
Usergroup: Customer
Joined: Nov 26, 2003
Total Topics: 70
Total Comments: 211
Is it currently possible to report which members downloaded a file attachment and show those stats to the owner of the attachment?
How long would that take to add (custom job)?
Thanks!
developer
Usergroup: Administrator
Joined: Dec 20, 2001
Location: Diamond Springs, California
Total Topics: 61
Total Comments: 7867
Showing the owner a list of the members who downloaded the attachment would be an estimated 3 hour custom project.
Forum Regular
Usergroup: Customer
Joined: Nov 26, 2003
Total Topics: 70
Total Comments: 211
Thanks! I'll start saving up right now :0) This is for me not my client. I'll also upgrade to the 5.0 series as well before that.
Forum Regular
Usergroup: Customer
Joined: Nov 26, 2003
Total Topics: 70
Total Comments: 211
Let me add one more thing. What if the data (about the user) only appears say 2 or 4 weeks after a download.
Basically I want to release the username data (of the person who downloaded the attachment) at a later date to prevent immediate contact by the owner of the attachment (which is considered rude in the industry I'm considering wsnlinks for). It seems like a an if/then statement might handle that. "IF the date of download is X THEN produce username/link"?
Does that add more to the quote or can I use the above situation to handle it?
I forgot one addition to the quote. I would also like the owner of the attachment to know which users visited their details page (the link details page with the attachment)...but NOT give away the username's info. I wouldn't link to the username's member page, just a text link so they know that so and so is visiting. I know that you can turn on who is visiting what page, but it isn't recording who visited what page. The owner of the link/attachment would only be able to see his/her stats for that page, not the public.
developer
Usergroup: Administrator
Joined: Dec 20, 2001
Location: Diamond Springs, California
Total Topics: 61
Total Comments: 7867
It would take considerably longer to do that. For the simple case previously described, I'd simply add a 'downloadingmembers' field in the attachments table and append the username to it at download. Now, to keep track of when the download took place, it'll require either packing time data into the field or adding another table to store download details. It also makes the display end much more complicated, instead of just putting the template variable in the template there now has to be a function to create an associative array of names and times, iterate that and output only the ones meeting a data threshold which itself will require a setting be added for the admin to specify it. I'll double the estimate to 6 hours.
I forgot one addition to the quote. I would also like the owner of the attachment to know which users visited their details page (the link details page with the attachment)...but NOT give away the username's info. I wouldn't link to the username's member page, just a text link so they know that so and so is visiting. I know that you can turn on who is visiting what page, but it isn't recording who visited what page. The owner of the link/attachment would only be able to see his/her stats for that page, not the public.
Admin Panel -> Settings -> Links -> "Track names of those members who've viewed each link and thread?". Does what you're requesting differ from this?
Since you keep adding stuff maybe a whole new generic tracking system would address the general point better. A table recording the first and last times any visitor who's a registered member visited various pages (presuming you don't need any middle times). Toplists could pull data out of that.
Forum Regular
Usergroup: Customer
Joined: Nov 26, 2003
Total Topics: 70
Total Comments: 211
Okay let's refine the quote in the simplest of terms for clarification.
----------------
1)Link submitters receive data (username linked to profile) on which users:
--- a)visited their page (every instance)
--- b)downloaded their attachment
--- c)data is spoon fed to link owners via their member home area (another tab under options)**
"Admin Panel -> Settings -> Links -> "Track names of those members who've viewed each link and thread?". Does what you're requesting differ from this? "
If this info can be released to linkowners, then YES, that's the idea for visitation tracking, I'd just be adding more data (who downloaded the attachment). If that already exists for admins only, can it be tweaked for users for ?
**Data is displayed as a table with headers like: Link title, visitation or download, date of download, username of person who downloaded or visited. It would also be prudent to be able to sort this data by 'Link title' or 'date of download/visitation' or "download versus visitation" or 'by username'.
-----------------
I've backed down on the time release of data issue because that's too complicated for my pocket book.
developer
Usergroup: Administrator
Joined: Dec 20, 2001
Location: Diamond Springs, California
Total Topics: 61
Total Comments: 7867
If this info can be released to linkowners,
Any data can be released to the people of your choice with template conditionals. To show a piece of data to the owner of a link, use <IF {THISMEMBERISREGISTERED} and {THISMEMBERID} is {LINKOWNERID}>stuff</IF>
1)Link submitters receive data (username linked to profile) on which users:
You seem to be contradicting yourself because you just finished explaining in the previous post why you didn't want usernames linked to profiles.
--- a)visited their page (every instance)
Already there, so no part of the project unless you want me to do the template customization.
--- b)downloaded their attachment
With the time data removed, this is back down to 3 hours (or less).
--- c)data is spoon fed to link owners via their member home area (another tab under options)**
Presumably that's just a toplist of their owned links, like the one already present in the member home.
If you'll be doing all the template stuff and all I'm doing is providing the template variable {ATTACHDOWNLOADINGMEMBERS} which shows the list, I can revise the estimate down to 1-2 hours.
Forum Regular
Usergroup: Customer
Joined: Nov 26, 2003
Total Topics: 70
Total Comments: 211
Sorry, didn't mean to seem like I was contradicting myself. I re-evaluated my needs over the past two days and restructured my new needs above.(1 a-c)
As of now, I DO want link owners to see profiles of users that download their attachments or visit their page, but I want the choice to remove the link if necessary and only mention the username (no html link to profile, just the username). That seems like something I could edit in the template later.
1a) I may need your help with the template programming, but I'll try it first and let you know if it's too complicated.
1c) what I think I meant was it's a table with all the visitation stats and download stats and accessible via the members home page as a choice in the options column. I think we're on the same page here.
So does the quote stand at 1-2 hours still?
I'm closer to my financial goal of saving up.
developer
Usergroup: Administrator
Joined: Dec 20, 2001
Location: Diamond Springs, California
Total Topics: 61
Total Comments: 7867
Still 1-2 pre-template, 3 with template stuff.
Forum Regular
Usergroup: Customer
Joined: Nov 26, 2003
Total Topics: 70
Total Comments: 211
Thank you. I'd like to add one more teeny thing to the quote.
This may already be possible and I'm just not understanding the member usergroup set up.
I want listing owners to be able to hide comments made about their listing, but not other comments on other listings (unless they own those comments).
As it stands now from what I gather, they either get to hide their own comments or hide all comments.
developer
Usergroup: Administrator
Joined: Dec 20, 2001
Location: Diamond Springs, California
Total Topics: 61
Total Comments: 7867
You're sure you mean the "hide" option currently on the edit comment page? It's the same effect really as soft-deleting (the only reason the option exists, I think, is that soft-deleting didn't exist when the hide option was added there).
I could give full edit access to the owner for comments on their listings relatively easily -- 1-2 hours. To give them only hide access without the rest of the edit comment page becomes more complicated, I suppose it'd require putting up a custom template that has only the 'hide' option and none of the rest... estimate 2 hours.
So in total, 3-5 / $150-$250.
Forum Regular
Usergroup: Customer
Joined: Nov 26, 2003
Total Topics: 70
Total Comments: 211
If they can hide any comment made from anyone on their listing already exists, then that's fine. I'm good with that.
Putting all my money ducks in a row. Will send email when ready.
THANKS!
developer
Usergroup: Administrator
Joined: Dec 20, 2001
Location: Diamond Springs, California
Total Topics: 61
Total Comments: 7867
You mean you want the hide-only access, not the edit comment page access option, right?
Forum Regular
Usergroup: Customer
Joined: Nov 26, 2003
Total Topics: 70
Total Comments: 211
I want member A, who is owner of link A to be able to hide any comment attached to link A regardless if member B owns the comment, but only for link A or any link owned by member A
And for the sake of clarification I know that a member can own a link, yet there's a link owner field in the link details form. I will not be using that. All members own their links and they can't assign a link to another owner using that link owner email field.
I hope that's clear.
Also: this may be a wrench in the fire, but if I use a custom attachment field for say an audio file or an image, will that F up the quote for the attachment download stats request? The stats are only needed for the attachment field that comes with wsn. Any custom fields could be ignored for the stats. I'm getting requests to add images and/or audio files to the link details page and if it will muck up the quote I had to make sure you knew.
I think I'll move to email because I bet if I'm more specific with my project, it will give you a bigger picture. Also we have that other quote to work on which is almost ready to go re:my client's.
developer
Usergroup: Administrator
Joined: Dec 20, 2001
Location: Diamond Springs, California
Total Topics: 61
Total Comments: 7867
I want member A, who is owner of link A to be able to hide any comment attached to link A regardless if member B owns the comment, but only for link A or any link owned by member A
I gave you two options for ways I can enable that, one giving extra privileges along with it. I'm just going to assume option B without clarification.
And for the sake of clarification I know that a member can own a link, yet there's a link owner field in the link details form. I will not be using that.
This isn't clarifying, it's extremely confusing, but I'll ignore it except to say that the link owner field is the member who owns the link... but this appears to have absolutely nothing to do with anything we were talking about.
Also: this may be a wrench in the fire, but if I use a custom attachment field for say an audio file or an image, will that F up the quote for the attachment download stats request? The stats are only needed for the attachment field that comes with wsn. Any custom fields could be ignored for the stats.
If the custom file fields can be ignored, then it won't take any extra time. Do the custom file fields have to be ignored? I can go either way in the same time, but it'd be a little conceptually cleaner to me to count them instead of exclude them.