I have site terms, about and contact modules on my website. I want to be able to change these items via CMS and not via changing .ASPX pages every once in a while. My question is how to store this data ? I used to store this kind of data in SqlServer but i always thought it is an overkill since data is a single row with different columns especially when in some cases i just need one column.
How do you handle this issue ?
I have used a poor-mans CMS in the past for this type of thing by reading an xml file, however, Umbraco is an excellent CMS you may want to look at.
Related
This is more of an advise / best practice question that I'm hoping someone has come across before and can give me a steer.
I need to build a web application (the client would like webforms because that's what their developers know for when i hand it over)
Essentially when the client logs in, they will pick a language then I need to replace the text for menus, input boxes etc. The client wants to add their translations and update them at any time.
Ideas I have looked at are:
Holding the translations in resource files, building an editor in to the web application and then adding attributes on the fly to my viewmodels.
Holding the translations in sql server so i have the name, language and translation as a lookup e.g. Home | French | Maison. Then on pre-render I'll scrape the screen for any controls needing translation in the menu, labels, text areas.
Does anyone know of any good examples or had the experience of doing this themselves.
I've a similar situation, and chose to store data in SQL.
Translation mistakes happen often, and you don't want to recompile or disassemble every time.
It is possible to avoid the need to republish, but I've found it just more intuitive and straightforward to maintain SQL.
Bottom line, it depends on the amount of data you have. If it's more than just a couple of keywords, it sounds like a job for SQL to me.
Edit:
In a similar question, users recommend using resources, claiming it is the standard method.
However, if your users are going to make changes to values on regular basis (not because of mistake correction, but because data actually changes), then SQL seems best fit for the job.
assuming i have a contacts orchard module which manages contacts
can i have two instance like so
mysite.com/WorkContacts/...
mySite.com/HomeContacts/....
and have the data partitioned by instance/location type etc.
I assume it should be but want to be sure before i dig any deeper
It's not possible by default (although I'm not saying impossible at all).
Each module has it's unique, hardcoded Id which prevents multi-instancing of modules by design. There are also many other reasons why it wouldn't be a good idea...
Achieving such behavior is possible of course, but in slightly different way. As Orchard is mainly about content, you are free to build your own, different content types for different contact types from existing parts and fields. And then you're free to create instances of those. It's described very well here.
HTH
This would probably be better asked over on the Orchard sites.
If you look at blogs functionality you can have multiple of those, following a similar pattern of code you could have multiple of the contacts modules.
The path /HomeContacts ... etc would be set through the routing functionality of Orchard.
I think what you're looking for might the multi-tenancy module, available from the gallery. The only difference with what you describe is that the instances would need different server names rather than subfolders like you decribed.
Then again it's not quite clear whether you only want to separate just the data for that module (in which case the suggestion to model it after blog is a good one) or for the whole site (that would be multi-tenancy).
I have a question about storing site configuration data.
We have a platform for web applications. The idea is that different clients can have their data hosted and displayed on their own site which sits on top of this platform. Each site has a configuration which determines which panels relevant to the client appear on which pages.
The system was originally designed to keep all the configuration data for each site in a database. When the site is loaded all the configuration data is loaded into a SiteConfiguration object, and the clients panels are generated based on the content of this object. This works, but I find it very difficult to work with to apply change requests or add new sites because there is so much data to sift through and it's difficult maintain a mental model of the site and its configuration.
Recently I've been tasked with developing a subset of some of the sites to be generated as PDF documents for printing. I decided to take a different approach to how I would define the configuration in that instead of storing configuration data in the database, I wrote XML files to contain the data. I find it much easier to work with because instead of reading meaningless rows of data which are related to other meaningless rows of data, I have meaningful documents with semantic, readable information with the relationships defined by visually understandable element nesting.
So now with these 2 approaches to storing site configuration data, I'd like to get the opinions of people more experienced in dealing with this issue on dealing with these two approaches. What is the best way of storing site configuration data? Is there a better way than the two ways I outlined here?
note: StackOverflow is telling me the question appears to be subjective and is likely to be closed. I'm not trying to be subjective. I'd like to know how best to approach this issue next time and if people with industry experience on this could provide some input.
if the information is needed for per client specific configuration it is probably best done in a database with an admin tool written for it so that non technical people can also manage it. Also it's easier that way when you need versioning/history on it. XML isn't always the best on that part. Also XML is harder to maintain in the end (for non technical people).
Do you read out the XML every time from disk (performance hit) or do you keep it cached in memory? Either solution you choose, caching makes a big difference in the end for performance.
Grz, Kris.
You're using ASP.NET so what's wrong with web.config for your basic settings (if it's per project deploy), then as you've said, custom XML or database configuration settings for anything more complicated (or if you have multiple users/clients with the same project deploy)?
I'd only use custom XML documents for something like a "site layout document" where things won't change that often and you're going to have lots of semi-meaningless data (e.g. 23553123). And layout should be handled by css as much as possible anyway.
For our team XML is a good choice (app.config or web.config or custom configuration file, it depends), but sometimes it is better to design configuration API to make configurations in code. For example modern IoC containers has in-code configuration APIs with fluent interfaces. This approach can give benefits if you need to configure many similar to each other entities or want to achive good human readability. But this doesn't works if non-programmers need to make configurations.
I'm wondering what would be the typical scenario for using an end-user report designer.
What I'm thinking of is to have a base report with all the columns that I can have, also with a basic view of the report (formatting, order of columns, etc.) and then let the user to change that format and order, take out or add (from the available columns) data to it, etc.
Is that a common way to address what is called end-user designer for reports or I'm off track?
I know it depends on the user (if it's someone that can handle SQL or not for example), but is it common to have a scenario where the user can build everthing from the sql query to the formatting?
Thanks!
Sebastian
The first thing I would think about is to put them in a very tightly controlled sandbox, both for security and also to prevent monstrous, server-eating queries. Beyond that, I think giving them a "menu" of limited options is a good path. I would not give them direct access to SQL.
First question is do you want users creating SQL that could become a run away query (think Cartesian join gone wild).
Depending upon your tooling you might want to publish your report as Excel. Creating a pivot table or a simple spreadsheet may provide the flexibility you are looking for but in a safe environment. Most users can handle removing columns, formatting, etc, in Excel and there are lots of self-help references that you might not find in a report writer tool.
How should I store (and present) the text on a website intended for worldwide use, with several languages? The content is mostly in the form of 500+ word articles, although I will need to translate tiny snippets of text on each page too (such as "print this article" or "back to menu").
I know there are several CMS packages that handle multiple languages, but I have to integrate with our existing ASP systems too, so I am ignoring such solutions.
One concern I have is that Google should be able to find the pages, even for foreign users. I am less concerned about issues with processing dates and currencies.
I worry that, left to my own devices, I will invent a way of doing this which work, but eventually lead to disaster! I want to know what professional solutions you have actually used on real projects, not untried ideas! Thanks very much.
I looked at RESX files, but felt they were unsuitable for all but the most trivial translation solutions (I will elaborate if anyone wants to know).
Google will help me with translating the text, but not storing/presenting it.
Has anyone worked on a multi-language project that relied on their own code for presentation?
Any thoughts on serving up content in the following ways, and which is best?
http://www.website.com/text/view.asp?id=12345&lang=fr
http://www.website.com/text/12345/bonjour_mes_amis.htm
http://fr.website.com/text/12345
(these are not real URLs, i was just showing examples)
Firstly put all code for all languages under one domain - it will help your google-rank.
We have a fully multi-lingual system, with localisations stored in a database but cached with the web application.
Wherever we want a localisation to appear we use:
<%$ Resources: LanguageProvider, Path/To/Localisation %>
Then in our web.config:
<globalization resourceProviderFactoryType="FactoryClassName, AssemblyName"/>
FactoryClassName then implements ResourceProviderFactory to provide the actual dynamic functionality. Localisations are stored in the DB with a string key "Path/To/Localisation"
It is important to cache the localised values - you don't want to have lots of DB lookups on each page, and we cache thousands of localised strings with no performance issues.
Use the user's current browser localisation to choose what language to serve up.
You might want to check GNU Gettext project out - at least something to start with.
Edited to add info about projects:
I've worked on several multilingual projects using Gettext technology in different technologies, including C++/MFC and J2EE/JSP, and it worked all fine. However, you need to write/find your own code to display the localized data of course.
If you are using .Net, I would recommend going with one or more resource files (.resx). There is plenty of documentation on this on MSDN.
As with most general programming questions, it depends on your needs.
For static text, I would use RESX files. For me, as .Net programmer, they are easy to use and the .Net Framework has good support for them.
For any dynamic text, I tend to store such information in the database, especially if the site maintainer is going to be a non-developer. In the past I've used two approaches, adding a language column and creating different entries for the different languages or creating a separate table to store the language specific text.
The table for the first approach might look something like this:
Article Id | Language Id | Language Specific Article Text | Created By | Created Date
This works for situations where you can create different entries for a given article and you don't need to keep any data associated with these different entries in sync (such as an Updated timestamp).
The other approach is to have two separate tables, one for non-language specific text (id, created date, created user, updated date, etc) and another table containing the language specific text. So the tables might look something like this:
First Table: Article Id | Created By | Created Date | Updated By | Updated Date
Second Table: Article Id | Language Id | Language Specific Article Text
For me, the question comes down to updating the non-language dependent data. If you are updating that data then I would lean towards the second approach, otherwise I would go with the first approach as I view that as simpler (can't forget the KISS principle).
If you're just worried about the article content being translated, and do not need a fully integrated option, I have used google translation in the past and it works great on a smaller scale.
Wonderful question.
I solved this problem for the website I made (link in my profile) with a homemade Python 3 script that translates the general template on the fly and inserts a specific content page from a language requested (or guessed by Apache from Accept-Language).
It was fun since I got to learn Python and write my own mini-library for creating content pages. One downside was that our hosting didn't have Python 3, but I made my script generate static HTML (the original one was examining User-agent) and then upload it to server. That works so far and making a new language version of the site is now a breeze :)
The biggest downside of this method is that it is time-consuming to write things from scratch. So if you want, drop me line and I'll help you use my script :)
As for the URL format, I use site.com/content/example.fr since this allows Apache to perform language negotiation in case somebody asks for /content/example and has a browser tell that it likes French language. When you do this Apache also adds .html or whatever as a bonus.
So when a request is for example and I have files
example.fr
example.en
example.vi
Apache will automatically proceed with example.vi for a person with Vietnamese-configured browser or example.en for a person with German-configured browser. Pretty useful.