InstanceSum on the nested relationship

Similar Questions

• Trying in vain the nested model CS4

  I created a page with a header and footer with 1 available pass header and footer fixed and most later recorded as a model after I had designed page like I wanted. I had put a Spry menu bar in the header area and the editable main content div after implementation of the model. Creating child pages from this model is is very well conducted. Then, I decided to add a secondary navigation bar on the side for a second series of pages on the site after reading DW CS4 Missing Manual (p. 755 McFarland). He gave this example as a good time to use nested templates. I created a new template (nested model) on the original model, then add a div tag in the div of the main content (the editable area only) placed a new bar from Spry menus in the div tag I added the div as compound selector, named .oneColFixCtrHdr #sidebar.

  Everything went smoothly, except one (planned, I guess) coupling. Being in an editable area, the side menu is editable as well, and wanted further changes to the sidebar of the nested model to reflect down to child pages. So, I followed McFarland and insert an editable region empty in the sidebar div to overcome this obstacle. That did not work as he claimed he would. Although changes in the sidebar now appear on the pages of the child, the main content div was more editbable in the pages of the child. I tried a creative work around trying to temporarily insert an editable region empty in the div sidebar to change the sidebar that would lead down to the pages of the child; then after making these changes, remove the editable empty that I inserted, so that the main content div would resume its editibility in the pages of the child. It worked, except a serious hitch - when changes have been made to the menu in the sidebar model nested (with the inserted editable empty), content for the main content div of the nested model is transferred to the child pages as well - lose any content already existed in the pages of the child. That won't work!

  I wonder if originally the sidebar should be put in place in the main model as a separate region of the div. of main content but, I didn't have a sidebar in the original model, which seems to complicate things.

  I also wonder if what I'm doing could not achieved by the implementation of the sidebar as an optional region in the main model instead of trying to achieve with a nested model (have not already tried optional regions, so I don't know). I'm not too deeply in the design, so I'm ready to go direction to get the best possible results, even if I have to go back a bit. I spent many hours trying to understand this point, and it baffled me. It's all part of the learning process, I guess...

  Oh, you're right. You put some of the menus in optional regions. Well, why not put javascript code at the bottom of the page also in optional areas? Then you can turn off the power when you don't need them both on when you need it.

  In this way, the javascript code to show nor cause warnings warning because it won't be there!

  About how the var at the bottom of the page code work with menu bars, don't forget that there are also linked javascript file which is the real engine behind the functioning of the menu bar. And you may also notice, especially on the pages where you have two menu bars, each variable set at the bottom of the page is unique. If I have read and understood a little better Javascript, I could be more specific, but suffice it to say that these assignments to variables at the bottom of the page file as much as say in javascript, "see this MenuBar1 up there? Do the work for me... And see MenuBar2 up there? This work, also. »

  For the brothers of the Atonement, my link is the Director of Internet Communications at Graymoor. He praised the work of an artist in New York. Then he hired me to do the job of the Spry menu bar (in all kinds of weather... so to speak). We got along well, and he decided that he would rather call all the coding to me. But we have worked very closely together... He knew what he wanted in the end, and I knew how to get there. When one of us has tried something new, we have conferred and came with the best result.

  Now, I'm writing a description of how the functions of the site (for its use and this possibility "in the case of one of getting us hit by a bus"... hopefully it never comes to that!) The interesting part of the employment relationship, is that I never met the gentleman face to face until after the site was launched, and we worked on it for 9 months.

  Ah, modern life!

  Beth

• Questions of Orbi and protect the nests.

  I use Orbi for a few weeks and so far no problem. Until today, when I realized my nest protection (fire alarm) is not connected to the network.
  I did a full reset on the nest, I could see the network 'nest' on my list of wifi on my iPhone, but it expires then said I have no network at home. And I do. Given that everything else works.
  Technical support nest is quite usuless. They will tell me just that Orbi isn't on the list not supported. (Because they don't know what it is).
  Any ideas?
  PS: I am connected through Fios.

  I'll answer my own question, as I understand the problem.

  For some reason, nest the deletion of your account and resseting it does not work. It will not be conn ct to Orbi. But a factory reset did the trick.

  To do a factory reset on nest protect so it does not work with Orbi, just hold the home button until it turns blue. Continue to hold until the NEST begins to tell you it's serial number. Release the button before nest is done reading. You will be asked to redo a complete set, and with the large network of Orbi, it worked like a charm.

• Airport Extreme a different IP address than the NEST

  Hi all

  I have an Airport Extreme new set up a network of comments.  The guest network is configured for the IP addresses in the 172.16... range, compared to the 192.168 range (which is for the network no comments).

  I put my nest on the network of comments.  I see in the settings on the nest indeed connected to the network with an IP 172.16 comments...

  But, when I look at the Airport utility it says the nest is connected using the IP 192.168... which means it is NOT on the network of comments.

  Something is wrong here - is there a bug in Airport utility, causing this or something else, you know?

  Thank you

  Allen

  Something isn't bad. It is normal, unless you want to call normal a "bug".

  AirPort Extreme uses VLAN technology... Virtual local area network... to provide Internet access to the nest using one and only available Internet connection to AirPort Extreme.  Indeed, the NEST uses the same network and the same Internet connection as your other devices that are not on the network of comments.

• I keep getting "the trust relationship between this workstation and the primary domain failed" error windows 2008R2

  Hi all

  I appreciate your help. And I hope that this issue has been addressed previously, although I couldn't find any solution there.

  I manage a domain windows 2008 with 3 domain controllers. Recently my workstations continue to fall out of the field. I get "the trust relationship between this workstation and the primary domain failed" to many workstations.

  I know how to fix properly, use netdom.exe. But the mistakes keep coming back. I don't know where to look for the source of this error. A possible problem might be the time in any field is out of sync. But all my workstations synchronize with the domain controller with the primary domain controller role and seems to work correctly.

  Are there other sources, that I need to check? This is getting frustrating.

  Thank you much for the help.

  Sincerely,

  Hello

  Post your question in the TechNet Server Forums, as your question kindly is beyond the scope of these Forums.

  http://social.technet.Microsoft.com/forums/WindowsServer/en-us/home?category=WindowsServer

  See you soon.

• Process * \MCSHIELD. EXE the nest (428) contained code signed or corrupted and could not perform an operation with a McAfee driver.

  XP SP3 system

  I get warnings like this when Mcafee updates.

  Process * \MCSHIELD. EXE the nest (428) contained code signed or corrupted and could not perform an operation with a McAfee driver.

  Process * \SVCHOST. EXE the nest (1632) contained code signed or corrupted and could not perform an operation with a McAfee driver.

  Is this a problem Microsoft or Mcafee?

  Do I need to fix?

  In the McAfee forums, there are several similar positions such as:

  https://community.McAfee.com/message/241542

  I'll sue your question on in their community, as they already seem to know about it.

  I would also say that, unless you are very fond of McAfee or you are forced to use it, you plan to replace it with something that has a smaller footprint, uses less resources and doesn't have these problems - something like Microsoft Security Essentials, you can get here:

  http://Windows.Microsoft.com/en-us/Windows/Security-Essentials-download

  MSE completed with the free version of MBAM and SAS should permanently keep your clean enough unless you're a daredevil like me:

  Download, install, update and do a quick scan with these free malware detection programs (not at the same time) and remove all threats:

  Malwarebytes (MMFA): http://www.malwarebytes.org/products/malwarebytes_free
  SUPERAntiSpyware: (SAS): http://www.superantispyware.com/

  SAS will probably report a lot of tracking cookies and you can just let him delete them.

  Even if you keep McAfee, I always supplement it with MBAM and SAS since no single AV program does seem to know everything.  If your McAfee of your system is clean, I would interpret that means - McAfee found nothing, says he knows.  It is prudent to use more than a reputable scanner to get more coverage.

  If you choose to spend (and you can't have both at the same time), you must be sure to use the uninstaller that you can get from here:

  http://service.McAfee.com/FAQDocument.aspx?LC=1033&ID=TS101331

  Your system will give you better performance.

• Second Process Explorer that run under the NEST 6200; as svchost.exe that runs under the NEST 6200

  I found, when the use of Process Explorer, that a second version of the Explorer P. works too, but its icon (left) is a standard and not the true icon of the Explorer P..  This second version ran under the NEST 6200, which I believe has to do with a modem.  I have a modem on my Vista machine, but it is not used (no telephone connection).  I went into the folder where P. Explorer runs and found procexp.chm, and when I tried to open the file, Windows said it was a program.  To disable, I renamed it, and now I'm not running.  Also, I found of svchost.exe running under the NEST 6200, but with no description, co. name, path or command line.  I have known big bed (over 500 MB), using svchost.exe, from time to time.  I think having a virus.  Can someone tell me what I have and then tell me how to remove from my machine?  (Also, I've known a slow machine, usually after starts.)

  I have two versions of svchost.exe on my machine.  Tests for a virus showed neither to be a virus.  I tried to delete the version that is not in the c:\windows\system32 folder but am unable to do so.  Can someone tell me how to delete such a file, or to replace it with the correct version?

  Hello

  Thanks for posting your question in the Microsoft community!

  After the description of the question, I understand that your computer is very slow. I'll be happy to help you on this question.

  Let us try the following methods.

  Method 1: I suggest you perform the clean boot and check if the problem persists.

  How to perform a clean boot for a problem in Windows Vista, Windows 7 or Windows 8
  http://support.Microsoft.com/kb/929135

  Note: Follow how to reset the computer to start as usual after a repair by article KB929135 clean boot to reset the computer in normal mode.

  Method 2: Virus scanner online by using the Microsoft safety scanner.

  Microsoft safety scanner
  http://www.Microsoft.com/security/scanner/en-us/default.aspx

  Note: when you perform online virus scanyou will lose some data which are affected by the virus. Microsoft is not responsible for the loss of this data.

  See also the link: Slow PC? Optimize your computer for peak performance
  http://www.Microsoft.com/athome/Setup/optimize.aspx#fBid=kmc757u4Zlo

  After trying the steps above suggested, giving us the results. If you are able to solve the problem concerning the performance or let us know additional troubleshooting results.

• the trust relationship between this machine and the primary domain failed

  Hi I have a virtual server (Server 03) with a vista machine, I can log on to the vista computer, but it happens with the trust relationship between this machine and primary domain failed. I tried to delete the domain vista machine, but he says you need to keep a main area

  Any suggestions gratefully received

  Hello

  Your question is more complex than what is generally answered in the Microsoft Answers forums. It is better suited for Windows Server on Technet. Please post your question in the Technet forums. You can follow the link to your question:

  http://social.technet.Microsoft.com/forums/en/category/WindowsServer/

• «Caching of connections from domain to Vista laptop fault for * some * users, which gives the message "failure of the trust relationship «»

  Greetings!

  I have a laptop wireless problem Vista Ultimate on a domain that has a strange behavior when taken off site. Of course, I'd appreciate some thoughts on what could be the problem.

  When the laptop is used internally, it works normally and is used by two people. Person "A" is the main user, person "B" is a secondary user who connects is rare. Domain authentication works normally and thankfully.

  Sometimes, however, when the laptop is taken off site and brought in a different wireless network do not have access to the field, strange behavior of logon follows.

  When the person 'A' tries to connect, they receive two messages:

  "The system event Notification Service failed to logon"

  "The trust relationship between this computer and the primary domain failed."

  Yet moments later, what person 'B' opens a session on the same laptop in the same place, the logon succeeds and the laptop runs normally.

  Presumably, the two openings of session would be finished via the credentials cached, so there is no reason at all to imagine that each account should be treated differently. However, it is precisely the situation that I see. Something is apparently originally person 'A' logon to be handled in an unusual way, I can't explain or stop.

  When this laptop is returned to its primary location, resumed normal operation, all users can perform normal logons domain-based, and no errors occur.

  If it was simply a problem of not being on the same wireless network and by far the field, I expect to see something in the sense of a message «could not domain controller be contacted...» ", but this is never; and he would likely by all users, no not one. It behaves almost as if caching credentials for the person 'A' are corrupt or non-existent, neither of which is logical.

  Other portable computers used by many people (using various combinations of XP, Vista and Windows 7) and taken offsite have * never * experienced this problem. They operated with credentials cached just like you would expect.

  I suppose that a complete reconstruction could solve the problem, but I prefer not to go nuclear on this particular area if it is not necessary. There must be an if explainable, eccentric, the mechanism at work here cause this problem.

  Thank you very much in advance for the help.

  -David

  Hello Soonerdave,

  I apologize for the lack of communication. The appropriate forum for post you in is listed below:

  http://social.technet.Microsoft.com/forums/en-us/itprovistanetworking/threads

  Hope this helps J

  Adam
  Microsoft Answers Support Engineer
  Visit our Microsoft answers feedback Forum and let us know what you think

• How to fix Windows 7 32 Bit error: the trust relationship between the th workstation and primary domain failed

  How to fix Windows 7 32 Bit error: the trust relationship between the th workstation and primary domain failed

  Hi João,.

  To help solve the problem, remove the PC from the domain and then connect the computer to the domain.

  Click the Microsoft KB Article below for troubleshooting steps.

  The trust relationship between this workstation and the primary domain failed

  Let us know how it goes.

  Thank you

• When you connect to Windows 7, get the error "the trust relationship between this workstation and the primary domain failed."

  You open a session in Windows 7, you get an error stating "the trust relationship between this workstation and the primary domain failed."
  Can someone help me please...

  AC of Phil wrote:
  > As you connect to Windows 7 you get an error saying "the trust relationship.
  ' > between this workstation and the primary domain failed.
  > Can someone help me please...

  Contact your domain administrator for the domain of the computer account
  recreated or reactivated, as appropriate.

  --

  Bruce Chambers

  Help us help you:
  http://www.CatB.org/~ESR/FAQs/smart-questions.html

  http://support.Microsoft.com/default.aspx/KB/555375

  They who can give up liberty for a little temporary
  safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~ Benjamin Franklin

  A lot of people could die rather that thinking; in fact, most do. ~ Bertrand Russell

  The philosopher never killed the priests, while the priest was
  has killed a large number of philosophers.
  ~ Denis Diderot

• Problem of password of account, without that we can connect to the network on this computer. The error indicates, "the trust relationship between this device and the network is no longer valid.

  Hi, I hope you can help with this problem. A friend has 6 computers networked to a Tower Server and have a problem. A worker student put computers into hibernation, and since then, nobody can connect to the network on this computer. The error indicates, "the trust relationship between this device and the network is no longer valid. I tried to get into the pc to try removing network and replace it, but I can't get on the Administrators account because it has been disabled. I'm at a loss on how to proceed. My friend cannot afford a service call, so I'll try to help him.  Thank you

  If the computer is on a domain then there are at least two accounts that can be used to remove the computer from the domain:

  • A domain administrator account.
  • A local administrator account.

  When your friend has launched Windows for the first time after buying the machine, he was prompted to enter the name of an account. This account is created automatically with administrator privileges. He should use it now.

• The trust relationship between this workstation primary domain failed

  During log on, I am faced with an error "of the trust relationship between this workstation primary domain failed. If I disconnect the connection to the local network, then I lon on. What is the permanent solution easily?

  Hi Laurent,.

  This error message can occur if the computer is not connected to the same domain (or is connected to a working group) which is connected to the server computer (or the field on which is connected to the computer that is running Active Directory). Additional assistance can be provided the forum TechNet Service directory.

  "The relationship between this workstation and the primary domain failed approval" error on a computer that is running Windows 7 or Windows Server 2008 R2

  https://support.Microsoft.com/kb/2914474/en-us?WA=wsignin1.0

  You can post the question on the TechNet link below.

  https://social.technet.Microsoft.com/forums/WindowsServer/en-us/home?Forum=winserverDS

  Let us know if you need assistance on our part.

• "The trust relationship" fails when you use the remote web access but local access is fine

  Hi people,

  I searched on this but haven't found all answers, or anyone who seems to have the same problem that I get.

  I can use my Win 7 Desktop Office 100% fine, network cable, no problem, "nothing has changed" for months. SB Server 2011

  I can log the Web remote access: Remote space fine and can download files, etc. Any fine.

  I can see the 'Connect' button for my computer desktop, but when I press on it and enter my username and password, I get "the trust relationship between this workstation and the primary domain failed."  I tried several remote computers XP and Win 7, always the same.

  I am sure that when I'm back in the office, the local logon will be fine as it always has been.

  Any suggestions?

  Thank you

  Tom

  Hello Tom,

  I appreciate all the research you have done.

  I suggest that you post the application on Microsoft TechNet forum because we have experts working on these issues. You can check the link to post the same query on TechNet:

  http://social.technet.Microsoft.com/forums/Windows/en-us/home?category=w7itpro

  Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have other questions related to Windows.

• The trust relationship between this workstation and the primary domain failed.

  The trust relationship between this workstation and the primary domain failed.  This only happens on the Windows 7 desktop.  It is sporadic.   Add the computer account to the domain is not a viable solution.  It happens far too often.

  There is nothing coherent we found on systems that are removed from the field.  Some time its workstations users, sometimes its laptops to students and sometimes he posts of laboratory work.  Different types of systems use different images.  All images are syspreped before creating the image.

  Hi Geoffrey,.

  Your question of Windows 7 is more complex than what is generally answered in the Microsoft Answers forums. It is better suited for the IT Pro TechNet public. Please post your question on the Technet Windows 7 Security Forum

  Lisa
  Microsoft Answers Support Engineer
  Visit our Microsoft answers feedback Forum and let us know what you think.