Hi Everyone, there is an issue with Utm parameters...
# suitecommerce
s
Hi Everyone, there is an issue with Utm parameters in the Url. They are getting stripped off in the PDP page which is a major drawback. Does any one have an idea regarding this or any patch code that is available? @Steve Goldberg @Flo
r
Any utm params that go to a PDP page that also has the quantity querystring param will get removed
Do you have an example URL
r
Yeah, its becuase of the quantity param
the core code removes the other querystring params
s
It means if we have a quantity param then the url parameters are stripped off? I don't think this a good behaviour
Because we must have the parameters in the url including the utm parameters
r
Yeah that is what happens. We had to customise the code to stop that from happening
We are currently on Elbrus
s
Though we have removed the quantity in the url still I can see the parameters are getting stripped off
r
that will because of size & color which are part of the PDP for selecting your choice
the utms remain.
s
No, actually they are not getting remained
r
on my test url above the utms remained.
very strange that they are disappearing for you
s
Actually, We want the url with the quantity,size,color selected and also with the Utm parameters including in it without getting stripped. Will be it fixed ?
Before 2019.1 it used to work but after the 2019.1 upgrade it stopped working previously we used to track along with those parameters
r
If you are using SCA and not SC you can customize the behaviour
s
We are using Sca, but after 2019.1 only the behavior stopped working.
r
@Steve Goldberg can you shed any light on this?
s
No, sounds like a defect so I would raise a case. I think that this has come up before and could be fixed in 2019.2 but IDK
s
@Steve Goldberg We have already raised a case and the support team said that it's a defect but we want this to be fixed in 2019.1 because the clients are not ready to upgrade as of now. Can this be possible?
s
You should really lead with that information
I can't offer anything additional
s
@Steve Goldberg Can you confirm whether this is fixed in upgrade?
Also, will it be possible if we use 2019.2 source code and fix it in 2019.1? If yes, can you guide us?
s
I can't confirm that it is fixed (as I said earlier) and no I cannot guide you, sorry.