Images with hidden external links

[Panos]

Today i decided to have a look at the code of one of my websites, i then
realized that there are some external links that i never add it in publisher,
so i found something like this:

<v:imagedata src="index_image310.gif"
o:href="http://www.*******.com/images/local/star-4.gif"/>

This is a picture i have copy it from another website and paste it in
publisher - i know that sometimes when you copy a picture from other websites
it can carry also the link of the website, so everytime i check about it -
when i look in the publisher this link is not appeared anywhere (not like
hyperlink, not in the format picture options, nowhere). I now realized that
there will be hundrent of external links like this in my pages, does anyone
know why that happen in publisher? how can i know for sure if a image carry a
link or not?

Do you know also if this "o:href" code is counting like a link from the
search engines?

Panos

 

[Spike]

Panos

Place the cursor on the image (don't move it) and is a second or so the link
will show if there is one. Right click and remove hyperlink. Just one of
the hazards of copying and pasting of images from other web sources.

Spike

 

[Panos]

No Spike, the link is not appeared NOWHERE !!! as i wrote before in the
publication even if you right click and search for hyperlink even if you look
in image properties (sometimes information are hidden in the Format Picture>
Web tab ) this information in nowhere...

 

[Spike]

Panos

Do you have a link that we can look at the original image so we may see it?

Spike

 

[Panos]

look the page and the code of this page: (iosholiday.com)

One of the images that this happen is the "4star" image

 

[Rob Giordano [MS MVP]]

From MS website;

Tag Syntax:
<v: element o:href="expression">

Script Syntax:
element.href="expression"

expression=element.href

Remarks:
When the shape is clicked, the browser will load the URL. The HRef attribute
is similar to the standard HTML HRef attribute of anchors.
Using this attribute makes it easy to create buttons with images on a Web
page.

This attribute is used by Microsoft Office only if a picture has been linked
and embedded. Microsoft Word has a user interface for inserting pictures
this way.

It's a Publisher/Word HTML/VML thing.




--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Giordano
Microsoft MVP Expression Web

 

[Panos]

The problem is that if you click on the image not any URL load and as i said
before this URL is not appeared inside the publication..so how i know if
images i use carry this elements or not? now i have a large amount of links
like this in my website that is hidden and i dont know even which pages have
this hidden URL, the only way to find is to scan page page the source code
and check all URLs

 

[Rob Giordano [MS MVP]]

Wellllll...Publisher works in mysterious ways so I'm not sure why...but
since the links ARE there in the html they will be read by spiders.
Removing them will be a nightmare because of the way Publisher works. If you
were using a true html editor it'd be a piece of cake to do a search and
replace.

In future if you're gonna "lift" images for reuse, copy the image file into
an image editor...don't Copy/Paste into Publisher. I don't know if that's
how the url followed the image or not but that's what I would do. My "guess"
is the links are not being followed comes from Publisher's VML / graphics
issues or the way images get flattened in Publisher layout.

Of course you have permission to use those images right?

hth



--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Giordano
Microsoft MVP Expression Web

 

[MAURH]

Panos,

If these pictures have a copyright on them, maybe the link has been added
deliberately in order to give a link back to the other website in the hope
that it will discourage people from copying them. I'm just guessing because
I wouldn't know how it is done, but perhaps you should check if you have
permission to use the pictures and maybe even look at the source code to see
which programme was used.

Maureen

 

[Panos]

The most of the pictures i copy are from the official websites of the hotels
i have in my website, these picture have free copyrights and never any hotel
make me any complain about this, also sometimes hotels contact me to inform
me about new launched pictures in order to update it.. but is not this the
issue. I have about 1000 pages created with publisher, i need now to look the
source code of each single page to find for these hidden links but before i
start this process i have 2 questions:

1) Looking in some SEO link external tools where you can analyse a givven
webpage and see all links i see that these links from these images are do not
included. So my question is: its sure that these links can be read by
spiders???

2) Does anyone know any online tool where it can search the code of a WHOLE
website for a given term. So for example i will put to search for the term
"o:href" and it will tell me in which pages (from all website pages) this
term exist. Something like this would be very helpful.

Panos

 

[DavidF]

Panos,

I don't know that it would be critical to remove those reference URLs from
your existing pages. At worst you are providing a "link back" to the pages
where you got the images to the search engines. As you said the URLs are not
active links where a site visitor can click it and be taken to another site,
so it will not pull any one off your site. I am not sure that it is worth
your time to try to go back and change out all those pictures, and as others
have said, perhaps you owe that site the reference for using their images.

As to how it happened, I suspect that it is as Rob suggested, that it is
related to how you copied, pasted and thus linked those pictures from the
original source. I would suggest that in the future you save the image to
your hard drive, with a new file name, and then insert it into the Publisher
file page. Don't directly copy and paste from another site. That should
strip off the reference URL. Test it to see. It appears that only the 4 star
gif file is linked to hotelinevenice. The one, two and three star images
reference your site. You apparently handles the 4 star gif differently than
the other images.

As to cleaning out the existing reference URLs, if you must then you won't
change the code...you change the image. If you try to simply change the code
then the next time you publish new updated pages, Publisher will again
produce the reference URL for that image. For the best quality image save
the image to your hard drive from the original site so as to make sure you
are getting the best quality. Then replace the original image on your Pub
page with the image from your hard drive.

You might also try an experiment first... Run the Compress graphics tool on
the pages. I notice that quite a few of the hotel pictures on your home page
are from one source. For example
http://static.booking.com/images/hotel/max300/100/1004955.jpg . Now if you
notice Publisher has made two copies of this image. Here is the IE version:
http://iosholiday.com/index_image439.jpg and here is the FireFox version:
http://iosholiday.com/index_image4391.jpg . Both the versions are smaller
than the original image from static.booking and the fact that you have two
copies says that you have not run the compress graphics feature on the page.
If you had, you would have only one image for both IE and FF. The experiment
is to use the compress graphics function in Publisher on that page and see
if that results in the original image from static being resized, renamed and
perhaps dropping the original source reference in the code in the process of
compressing it. If this works then you need only compress the graphics on
all your sites...which you should do anyway, and republish in order to get
rid of the reference codes. Hope this works...it would save you a lot of
time.

This of course offers a faster fix if you do decide to replace the original
images that are producing the reference site code that you don't want. If
you are satisfied with the quality of the image that Publisher produces
after you compress the graphics and Publisher it copies the inserted image
for the published web files, then use it to replace the original image. Then
you won't have to go back to the original site to capture and save the image
again. In other words first compress all the images, then Publish to the web
to your local computer. Then work through your Publisher file by going to
each picture on the page > right click > change picture > from file and
browse to the folder where you saved your web files, change to thumbnail
view, and insert the picture file that Publisher produced. It will take a
while, but it will certainly be faster than going back to the site where you
got the picture to begin with.

Just my two cents worth...

DavidF

 

[Rob Giordano [MS MVP]]

1) Yes. But as David states, the only thing this is doing is providing a
back link to your "partner" site...all in all not really a bad thing. It
would be bad if it was a competitor's site.

2) Yeah...a real html editing program...but you're pretty well entrenched
with Publisher now so this is probably not an option for you at this point.
However, seeing as how your site is growing you may want to start learning
now.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Giordano
Microsoft MVP Expression Web

 

[DavidF]

Panos,

While I am still hoping that you will report back that compressing the
graphics fixes the linked URL, I had another thought. Open your Pub file >
right click one of the images that is linked to one of the outside URLs >
change picture > graphics manager. This will open the graphics manager in
the left task pane and that image will be highlighted. If the image is
tagged as Linked vs. Embedded, then mouseover the "linked" and you should
see a downward pointing chevron which you should click to open the options >
choose "covert to embedded picture". Now test to see if when you publish you
still get the linked URL. If not then changing all the "linked" images in a
publication via the graphics manager to "embedded" should be faster than
inserting new images.

DavidF

 

[Panos]

Dear David and Rob thanks for your answers and your time. The things are:

Still i am not 100% sure if this o:href links are read or not by the spiders
but anyway i have decided to remove it. I dont have the Compress image option
in my Publisher, to try what you suggest David, i think this is because i
havent install the SP1 of the Office. Tryied the second option you told me
about the graphic manager, so when i click on the image and the graphic
namager open there say "original image missing" so i couldnt find the option
"covert to embedded picture". Anyway with this way i would need to know which
images have this hidden refer link but the problem is that i dont know. The
only way to find is from the code of each page so what i will do is this:

I will publish all files from all my websites into my PC and then
(fortunately) using XP search option where it can search in the code of .htm
files i will search for the term "o:href" and this will tell me which pages
include these kind of links. I have the hope that will not be 1000 pages
because in my latest websites i had stop copying images direct from other
website and i use the more safe option to call any image using code fragments
<img src="http://www.******.jpg"> ( i think this is the best way and also
dispaly the images in a better way). So when i know which pages has this
link i will go in publisher i will just save this picture in my hard drive
and then i will change the old image.

Rob you mention something about "real html editing program" do you have any
to suggest me (just to try).


Thanks for all the help and the support.
Panos

 

[DavidF]

You really should use the compress pictures option on your sites even if it
doesn't fix the problem of the reference URLs. Without it, you are slowing
the loading of your pages significantly in IE. You are correct that you need
at least SP1 to install the compression feature.

Reference: Compress graphics file sizes to create smaller Publisher Web
pages (2003):
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/publisher/HA011266301033.aspx

There are three SPs available for Office 2003, and I would suggest that you
download and install SP2 which contains SP1. However I have elected to *not*
install Office SP3 as it is known to create some problems that I want to
avoid. That is of course up to you, but I am one of those people that do not
install all updates because they frequently break something in order to fix
something else. I have automatic updates turned off on my machines. However,
in your case I would take the time to install SP2, if for no other reason
than to install the compression graphics feature. I also personally prefer
to download the patch separately and keep it on file in case I need to
install it again, and always avoid letting MSFT do their automatic updates.
In my opinion it is much safer to patch your computer this way.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...97-2db6-4654-9db6-ec7d5b4dd867&displaylang=en

Panos, you are heavily invested in using Pub 2003 and that leaves me
concerned. While I am still using Pub 2000 for my sites and don't plan on
making a change in the near future, I have always felt that Publisher webs
are best used by people that are building relatively simple, static and
small sites. The larger a site gets, the harder it becomes to manage with
Publisher.

You have perhaps come to a place where it is time to consider moving to
different software to build your sites given that you are about to go back
and rebuild 1000 pages. If you are going to do that, then perhaps it is time
to rebuild using different software that will make it easier to manage your
sites in the future. Unless you are prepared to live with Publisher 2003 for
a long time, now is the time to consider moving to something else. MSFT is
deprecating the web building functionality in Publisher starting in
Publisher 2010. You will be able to open and edit your old Publisher web
publications with Pub 2010, but it is going to be hard to create new web
publications. Bottom line is that MSFT has decided to abandon Publisher web
building and push people toward their standards compliant Expression Web
html editor, SharePoint, or their simplistic Live sites. I think that now
would be a good time for you to invest some time in evaluating the option of
changing to a different program, before you invest a lot of time editing
1000 Publisher web pages. Here are some references to get you started:

A 30 day trial for Expression Web is available from
http://www.microsoft.com/expression/

SharePoint Designer is a free download from
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/sharepointdesigner/FX100487631033.aspx
It will not be free when the new Office 2010 comes out this Spring/Summer so
if you are interested you might want to download a copy right away.

FrontPage was replaced by Expression Web and MSFT Office SharePoint
Designer. You will have to learn some HTML and CSS coding to use Expression
web. Expression Web is aimed at standards compliant web sites, and has built
in support for PHP and asp.NET 2.

The newsgroup for Expression Web is microsoft.public.expression.webdesigner
The link
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.expression.webdesigner
should open the group in your news reader.
There is also a forum at
http://social.expression.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/web/threads
Read the thread on this forum titled:

BEFORE POSTING - Read this Expression Web Forum FAQ - Important
Information! - BEFORE POSTING
(
http://social.expression.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/web/thread/99c95aee-bfe6-4c4d-80d4-8d197194a942 )

It contains lots of useful information and links.

Reference: Office Live Small Business: "Get Started Free":
http://smallbusiness.officelive.com/en-us/
Office live uses simplistic web templates. I list it here in case someone
else is interested but I would say that you need more than this option.

Reference: Nvu - open-source web authoring program:
http://net2.com/nvu/
This is a free open-source full html editing standards compliant program
that I and others have suggested over the years as an alternative to MSFT
software.

There is free blogging software available too. Try googling the subject of
free blogging, http://blogger.com or http://wordpress.org/ is highly
recommended.

Or perhaps use a dynamic "content management system" like Joomla which is
PHP and MySQL based: http://www.joomla.org/ or http://drupal.org/
This might actually be a good choice for the type of websites you are
building as all of them are similar and you just vary the content.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...snum=0&ct=broad-revision&cd=2&ved=0CDQQ1QIoAQ

And finally if you want the advantages or laying your pages out much as you
do with Publisher you could try Serif WebPlus which has also been
recommended. They have an old version for free, but the newest version is
affordable. It already has a lot of the features that have been on my wish
list for years and never implemented into Publisher such as the option of
centering the pages. It is the direction the MS should have taken Publisher
in my humble opinion. It is my understanding that it produces standards
compliant code and also gives you the option of editing the code directly.
It might be a good choice for you. They have a forum that you might check
out. Mike Koewler, a frequent poster to this newsgroup, prefers WebPlus to
Publisher.

http://www.serif.com/webplus/
http://www.freeserifsoftware.com/software/webplus/index.asp

Bottom line is I think you may have outgrown Publisher and given that you
are facing a major time commitment in fixing these URL references, I would
recommend that you invest at least a little time now considering other
software. In the long run you will probably be happier with other software
given how big your sites have grown.

Good luck.

DavidF

 

[Panos]

David many thanks for the very rich information and the useful advices. I
think you are right, its time to change software, the true is that publisher
it has a very friendly interface and you can do a lot of things but the
compability with the browsers, the centered pages, backgrounds etc are a
little nightmare. I just now realized that i have the SP3 pack of publisher
and the compress picture it was just not activated, i have activate it and i
will follow your advice to reduce all image sizes, also i realized that the
the automatic updates was on and this SP3 has come automatically without to
know it, also maybe this is the reason that during the past months i have
notice some unknow changes like uncompability with the greek language (i get
always some advise messages, and also some other functionality issues).

I have decide to try some new of the software you recommended, i already
have tried wordpress.org and elxis.org but the true is that i am not so much
satisfy for what i want. Elxis is too compicated and wordpress is mostly
focus on blogging (i use it only for my 2-3 blogs i have). I have seen the
demo of Serif Webplus (> http://www.serif.com/webplus/) and the enviroment
seems like Publisher, have you try this? Do you think is a good choice for
the next level after publisher? I am not planning to tranform my previous
websites to the new software, this is for the new websites that i am planning
to build.


Panos

 

[DavidF]

Panos,

You are welcome.

Don't get me wrong. I am not advocating that people should not patch their
computers. I think that most people will probably have fewer problems if
they automatically patch, than if they don't. But, I also have noticed way
too often that MSFT or other companies will issue patches that breaks
something in order to fix something else, and sometimes that is even
necessary. The SP3 patch makes it impossible to open some older Office files
that are susceptible to being virus infected. So you can see what the trade
off is. In my case I have a lot of legacy software and old computers and
files, and so I chose to take the risk of not installing that patch. But
that is my semi-informed choice and most people should probably just let
MSFT and other companies patch their computers. I usually wait at least
until MSFT issues a SP which combines all the small individual patches that
have been issued up until then, and after they have had a chance to de-bug
those patches. To each their own...

As I suggested, I think WebPlus is where MSFT could have and should have
taken Publisher, so yes, I guess you could describe it as the next level. I
have ordered the most recent version of WP, but have not installed it. I do
suspect that if I ever move away from Publisher that I will try WebPlus, but
that does not mean that it is the best choice for you or anyone else. Part
of the reason I gave all the options to you is that I think that the best
choice of software depends upon the scope and goals you have for your
website. The Office Live websites might be perfectly fine for someone that
just wants a web presence and can live with a cookie cutter template that
does not allow for much customization. The blogging software could be the
best choice where the content is more textual than graphical, and if your
site focus is on ecommerce then something that allows for more dynamic
content management might be best. I think that Expression Web might be the
best choice for software that won't ever be limiting in scope and is
standards compliant, but it has it's own set of bugs and issues and is
overkill for many people that use Publisher. I think that MSFT has left a
big gap between it and the Office Live websites after dropping FrontPage and
now that they are phasing out Publisher. I suspect a lot of Publisher users
will go to Serif WebPlus as it should be a whole lot easier to learn and use
than Expression. I can't say which software would be best for you, but if
you like how Publisher works, then WebPlus is the closest of the software I
listed. Too bad MSFT didn't take Publisher there...

DavidF

 

[Rob Giordano [MS MVP]]

Serif is better than Publisher, but it's still not a true html editor but it
is much closer than Publisher is.
Expression Web
Dreamweaver
are the top two, but will require some learning curve...EW is less expensive
than DW.

You can transition slowly but remember NOTHING will convert from Publisher
to any web editor except maybe the images, everything else you'll end up
redoing...but your site will be standards compliant and your compatibility
issues will be much much fewer.


--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Giordano
Microsoft MVP Expression Web

 

[MAURH]

Another good web building programme that might be worth looking at, comes
from Netobjects Fusion http://netobjects.com/ there is a free download
which you could try.
One of the good things about it is that, like Publisher, you don't need any
prior knowledge of coding. It's a WYSIWYG with a 'drag and drop' feature and
also has a 'Wizard' which will see you through most of the steps.
I understand there is also has a good support team.

Maureen