Please please help re Xara Web Designer 6 and Deleting Browsing History

**pauland** · 14 February 2011, 05:51 PM

Glenn, if the problem were as BIG as YOU suggest nobody would use the software.

Post #14 was quite explicit and really solved your problem as you have acknowledged, so "STILL NO ANSWER"? I think not.

Nobody is calling themselves experts.

CAPS IS JUST BAD MANNERS, or just plain PATRONISING.

Good luck Glenn.

**bjornkn** · 14 February 2011, 07:50 PM

There's another <meta> tag you might try too:
<META HTTP-EQUIV="expires" CONTENT="0">
It may or may not work, depending on the browser?
It tells the browser to check if there is a newer version available than the one in the cache, and then is supposed to load the new one.

I just looked at your page again and found that it was scrambled. What happened was that the main picture was moved to the first menu button.
A simple refresh/F5 fixed the problem, and that is really the preferred/common way to fix such problems.
You may tell Xara to give the main image a specific name, by adding a name to it, like 'filename="main_image"'
Then it will not be renumbered and mixed up with the other exported images even if you rearrange/edit your site.
BTW, I have never had such problems when changing things. Every time I've uploaded some changes of course I need to F5/refresh to see the changes.
I have never gotten any images moving around into buttons etc, even though I usually don't add filenames to my images, but let Xara choose a number.
And when visitors come to the page for the first time they will see it correctly anyway. I think most browsers by default flushes their cache when closed?
Using those meta tags may cause all your pages to reload every time, even when going back and forth between them. That may be more of a nuisance than appearing scrambled now and then (after an update).

**Glennn** · 14 February 2011, 08:09 PM

Thank you so much Bjornkn, i really appreciate all your help to help me. Thank you so much.
So you saw now what it does ... the scrambling i mean, but the wierd thing is, pressing F5 on my side doesnt fix it for me. The only thing that fixes it is to delete the browsing history.
Bjornkn, the only thing i have left to ask is this: why, of every website that i have ever visited, be it google, or any website, i have NEVER had this problem before with any website, i have never in 5years pressed the F5 button, or even had to press it .... but now, it seems, i have to tell every client of mine to use f5. It is just crazy. Ive never had to use f5 for any website, but mine so far CANNOT be used without f5, or deleting browsing history. Im using internet explorer 8, and the browsing history/cache, on exit, does not seem to be cleared. There may very well be a place where one can set that, but even if there is, that doesnt solve my problem for the other people in the world who are viewing my site. I am very disheartened and sad that still this issue is not resolved. It is so embarressing for me, for people to log onto my website and see a scrambled picture ... there are many out there who dont know about F5 or even about deleting a browsing history ... i will try the other code you suggest ... thank you so much for your help. Thank you thank you. gleNN

**handrawn** · 14 February 2011, 08:28 PM

Hi

I don't know much about designing websites, but I use them a great deal

I've been looking at your site several times during this thread and I have yet to see a problem as a user [IE8/XP]

At the moment it seems to work very well

browsers are not the only things that have cache - do you use a proxy server [or does your ISP ?]

**ckh** · 14 February 2011, 10:51 PM

Microsoft actually states for refreshing, use ctrl-F5 to force the refresh from the website. I normally hold down the shift key and click the refresh icon to refresh it.

The web designers I know all use this trick and I often tell my hosting customers, that's what they need to do when they make changes and can't see the results, they often think they uploaded to the wrong directory.

It's a very poor practice to put the non-cache metatag in the header. Browsers cache for a reason, as stated earlier in the thread, to speed up loading. It doesn't matter what software you use to create the site, it's going to be the same.

**w00dy** · 15 February 2011, 07:01 AM

ckh... Can I just say that I use DP6 for just about everything out of choice but also have the latest versions of WebPlus and WYSIWYG WebBuilder and neither display this little quirk that occurs with WB6/DP6. It'd be interesting to know what John (covoxer) has to say about no cache tags,etc.

**pauland** · 15 February 2011, 07:43 AM

w00dy, other programs don't generate the images used for the website as Xara does, so cache problems aren't so obvious because the images don't change their name as the website is updated - this means that even if the cache isn't fully updated, most content remains unchanged anyway and new content is fetched. With Xara image names are recycled, so if the cache is partially out of date, the page can look scrambled.

Xara gives users the ability to mitigate this effect by naming images, which means that caches are more likely to have the correct content in place.

Ultimately, just as with all other software, you learn to use the software and adapt your working practices to suit the technology to your needs. This caching issue exists for all software but is exacerbated by the way Xara hand-holds the user saving them from having to do all the donkey-work required by other software. In practice, professional web developers don't refresh their website several times a day, exacerbating cache issues, or if they do, they take steps (already described in this thread) to minimise issues. It's very poor practice to be testing web page updates by publishing to a live site, until the site is ready for public consumption.

Regarding forcing the cache to be flushed - this is something that web developers should not normally do - it slows page loads and makes websites load more slowly than they should. As a workaround for Xara it could be useful, but if I did use this method, I would republish a couple of days later (without other changes) with that cache setting code removed.

Xara software does great things to make web publishing easy. In some cases where people use it with poor working practices, some of the more technical issues of web publishing manifest themselves in unwanted ways. This requires that web developers up their game - either by adapting their working practices using Xara, or incorporating more technical means to circumvent unexpected (to the inexperienced) behaviour of web technology.

All the angst about caches can be solved by incorporating web workarounds (already described in this thread and elsewhere) while using Xara, or adopting a more professional publishing regime whilst using Xara. Alternatively, by aquiring some web technology skills, users who cannot live with the reality of internet caches and Xara page development, could use a text editor to write their HTML pages directly, or try and cut corners to HTML enlightenment using other software, which will clip their wings in other ways.

99% of Xara users don't have a problem with Xara web generation, others that do either up their game by taking on-board the realities of the web and Xara page generation, or continue to blame their tools while everyone else gets on with the job.

**Big Frank** · 15 February 2011, 08:28 AM

I haven't read all of this thread but you could, if you wanted to, put this little javascript snippet somewhere on the page (in a placeholder obviously):

Code:

<a href="javascript:location.reload(true)">Not displaying properly? Refresh this page</a>

You could either leave it there permanently or just until you resolve the problem. I do think, however, that this is most likely an ISP or proxy cache problem.

You could also set your own browser to not cache any pages:

http://www.wikihow.com/Clear-Your-Browser%27s-Cache

**Glennn** · 15 February 2011, 08:46 AM

Originally Posted by pauland

w00dy, other programs don't generate the images used for the website as Xara does, so cache problems aren't so obvious because the images don't change their name as the website is updated - this means that even if the cache isn't fully updated, most content remains unchanged anyway and new content is fetched. With Xara image names are recycled, so if the cache is partially out of date, the page can look scrambled.

Xara gives users the ability to mitigate this effect by naming images, which means that caches are more likely to have the correct content in place.

Ultimately, just as with all other software, you learn to use the software and adapt your working practices to suit the technology to your needs. This caching issue exists for all software but is exacerbated by the way Xara hand-holds the user saving them from having to do all the donkey-work required by other software. In practice, professional web developers don't refresh their website several times a day, exacerbating cache issues, or if they do, they take steps (already described in this thread) to minimise issues. It's very poor practice to be testing web page updates by publishing to a live site, until the site is ready for public consumption.

Regarding forcing the cache to be flushed - this is something that web developers should not normally do - it slows page loads and makes websites load more slowly than they should. As a workaround for Xara it could be useful, but if I did use this method, I would republish a couple of days later (without other changes) with that cache setting code removed.

Xara software does great things to make web publishing easy. In some cases where people use it with poor working practices, some of the more technical issues of web publishing manifest themselves in unwanted ways. This requires that web developers up their game - either by adapting their working practices using Xara, or incorporating more technical means to circumvent unexpected (to the inexperienced) behaviour of web technology.

All the angst about caches can be solved by incorporating web workarounds (already described in this thread and elsewhere) while using Xara, or adopting a more professional publishing regime whilst using Xara. Alternatively, by aquiring some web technology skills, users who cannot live with the reality of internet caches and Xara page development, could use a text editor to write their HTML pages directly, or try and cut corners to HTML enlightenment using other software, which will clip their wings in other ways.

99% of Xara users don't have a problem with Xara web generation, others that do either up their game by taking on-board the realities of the web and Xara page generation, or continue to blame their tools while everyone else gets on with the job.

"Im not your enemy"
"Pauland ... rambling, too long .. won't even bother to read everything you write"
You know what Pauland ... i DO know this is not the place to get personal, but that first sentence i just wrote, didn't it sound like you? Thru our correspondence, i just picked up this bad vibe, it's like you are putting people down, and you must stop that Pauland. Look in the mirror, and try be nice ... i have been very nice to you ... yet it's as if you put people down, and i read it agian in your loooooooong writing ..... (which generalyy is good ... except if you didn't put people down. Anyway, the fact remains, Xara is not displaying things properly .... and with, or without you, WE, those of us who are having this problem, WILL get it sorted. So hush Pauland. The reason why, as you state, that is IF it is not a generalised statement, that u THINK 99% of people are not having this problem ... is because people are either not doing regular updates on their site, they use it for a one time design, and may make changes once a month, twice a year, or never at all .... and maynot be aware of what is happening. As to the people who HAVE to do regular changes, because stock gets added daily/weekly, price changing etc ... I am sure THEY are the ones who are in this situation. But i will hush, because you are justifying (or trying to), a serious shortfall in Xara .... XARA IS A FANTASTIC PRODUCT WHEN IT COMES TO USER FRIENDLINESS, ONE BUYS IT FOR THE REASONS YOU STATE, EASE OF USE, etc etc etc .... yet if it publishes the first time perfectly, and then after changes, a week later, users are FORCED TO press F5 or Delete their Browsing History ....then that in itself is a problem. My hope, is that if you should come back with help or comments in this forum ... that you would at least try to UNDERSTAND OUR problem, the first step beinb to see that there is a problem .... and if not see it as a problem, see it as a shortfall ... and be a part of the solution, without putting US down as if WE are the problem. Because we are not Pauland. Even if you THINK we are. We are just people (like you), who want something to work, and not give these problems. It would be wonderful, if when i pressed publish, after making changes, tomorrow, next week, next month, if the website went thru, and a user on the other side of the world, a user of 8years old, a user of 80 years old, didnt have to press F5, or delete history, to see the poerfect design that i see on my screen within the program. Wouldn't that be wonderful Pauland. Well, so far, it aint happenin like that with Xara Web Designer 6 .... Pauland, think about EVERY OTHER WEBSITE IN THE WORLD ... perhaps a billion of them. Perhaps a Trillion? I have yet, in all the years that i have been on the web ... I have yet, as a user, to press F5. And i have NEVER EVER NEVER EVER seen a website on the net, that comes up scrambled. And no, it's not becasue it's a trial version, placed on the net, please Pauland, stop putting people down. I'm glad though, that through all this, that you do admit, that ... there are cache issues with Xara Web designer 6. Because there most certainly are. That should make you think a little, as to yr replies re Xara Web Designer 6. Take care

**bjornkn** · 15 February 2011, 08:54 AM

I wonder how you that have (cache?) problems upload your pages?
Do you use Xara to publish, or a separate ftp program like FileZilla?
I have not had any problems with neither Xara nor FileZilla, but with FileZilla it may be easier to mess things up?
Or maybe it is what beretgascon thinks - a problem with the ISP(or rather web server?) or proxy cache?
OTOH it wouldn't hurt if Xara kept the names of those images that already have a (file)name?
Or by default added a "filename=xx" name to them?