I find the repetition of sets of controls for each of the EditItemTemplate, InsertItemTemplate, and ItemTemplate templates of a FormView to be tedious and risky, in terms duplicating layout and code etc. I would much rather create a xxxDetails user control, and use this in each template, cutting layout and code location down to one location.
However, this introduces several complexities for data binding scenarios. Are there any extablished patterns or practice guides for using user controls in these scenarios?
Microsoft just added really great support for this in ASP.NET 4.0. It is called DynamicData. They added methods on all data controls called EnableDynamicData(type). There are default templates included in ASP.NET, but you can make your own.
To use built custom templates, just add a DynamicData/Templates directory in your folder. Inside it you can add type views insert and edit templates for all of your data types. The default templates have validators built in so they are a great starting point!
Here is a sample I put together for using custom controls in DynamicData templates. I used a slider for editing integers, and CurrencyInput for money etc...
If you can go with using ASP.NET 4.0 I would highly recommend doing this. Also, even if you can't, you still might want to use the pre-built templates as guidance.
Related
This question would apply to a typical CRUD page allowing the user to ADD, and/or EDIT a specific record.
Question about WebForms DetailsView control (and possibly FormView and GridView) -- Do we really need to specify BOTH the Edit-template AND the Insert-template which are essentially the same?
If not, which template should be designed/specified?
Your answer and comments are welcome.
Thanks...J.
In my experience you don't have to specify either template. In fact the only time I even use templates is if I want to customize certain attributes that you can only do via a template. I typically use templates when I want to have RequiredFieldValidators. Otherwise I don't use them at all. But you certainly can have neither, either or both.
That being said, I do usually have Item, Insert and Edit templates when I do need the extra flexibility of templates. Seems more complete to me.
In jsp and php it's very common to have files with pieces of HTML/Java/PHP code and have other jsp/php files consume them. That's fundamental for reusability.
In asp, M$ created another approach, master pages. But I'm having trouble to get used to it, to be forced to have ALL reusable code in a unique file. In example, some apps with many pages may have a breadcrumb area, while simpler apps won't need it.
Yes I can put those blocks inside a ContentPlaceHolder and just add them empty to asp pages they aren't needed. But I'd rather have them on their own files and include them when needed, instead of "removing" them when not needed.
Another example is about menus. Each app has its own menu. In jsp and PHP I can have a local file with the HTML menu and add it. In asp, the best I could imagine is have the "master master page" with an example menu code, then have a local "nested master page" only with local app's menu, and have asp files consume that "nested master page".
Is it the only way to do these stuff? Or is there a better way for doing it?
You have many choices with ASP.NET web forms.
If you just need to share server code, such as utility functions, you can add additional classes to your web project and instantiate/call them just like any other code. Classes added in this manner are accessible to all of your pages.
If you want to share server side code across multiple projects, you can create a new project of type "Class Library," compile it, and set a reference to the resulting DLL from all of your web projects.
If you have a page snippet or section (e.g. a menu system) that is common across pages, you have two choices: custom controls or user controls.
Custom Controls: these are controls written from scratch exclusively using code. Essentially, you write a class which extends Control (directly or indirectly), and you take care of everything. You need to write logic to create child controls that you want to use, and you override the Render method to perform rendering. Typically, you build this control into a redistributable assembly (i.e. a DLL), which can then be used by any ASP.NET applications, simply by placing the assembly in the 'bin' directory of the app (or in the Global Assembly Cache).
User Controls: these control are written using an ascx file, which looks much like an aspx page. i.e. you can simply drag and drop the UI elements that you want to use into the design surface. You don't need to worry about control creation, nor about overriding the Render method.
Sounds to me like you want a user control in this scenario. Here is a helpful walkthrough to get you started.
I will echo scheien's sentiment and tell you that you might want to look carefully at MVC, which is totally different but might fit better with your PHP mindset.
We are building a Page with dynamic functionality using ASP.NET + Sitecore 7.0.
Is it practical and appropriate use Sitecore templates for:
SQL Stored Procedure Name to be invoked
JavaScript to be invoked
ColumnNames to be used etc (related to coding customization)
Or should these configuration properties remain inside the ASP.NET Project itself?
What is the primary purpose of Data Templates in Sitecore?
Are they for developer customization or customer-level customization?
The purpose of a data template in Sitecore is to define the set of fields for content items which inherit from that template. - Think of a data template as a class and the content items (pages) as instances of that class.
Templates are usually used to define the user-editable content of pages within a site, that being said you can have items to store information which is not managed by regular content editors. The question is where do you draw the line between things which should be put into Sitecore and things which should be a part of the solution. My advice is only put things in Sitecore if they need to be there. If you have to have the ability for editors or admins to configure those settings/properties.
I would say that putting SQL/ColumnNames is probably a bad idea unless you are building some sort of report builder interface in which case it may be essential?
Likewise with placing JavaScript into Sitecore; this can be OK in moderation (e.g. snippets of analytics code which content editors may want control over?). If you're placing whole libraries of JavaScript into Sitecore, you're probably doing it wrong.
One final point to note is findability/re-factorability of code: if you have code spread between Sitecore and your solution, it can make it very difficult to maintain as it is difficult to get a complete overview of code involved.
I am looking to create a widget that can be used with other solutions. The widget is a competition widget that can be placed in different parts of the site.
What is the best way to do this? Should I create a new solution to hold this in?
Create a new class library project (you can have it within your current solution if it suits) and create your server controls in there. You can then reference this library from whatever websites you need.
You need to create a Web Control, not a User Control, if you want o use it in other projects. This question details the different control types, you may find it useful:
What is the difference between UserControl, WebControl, RenderedControl and CompositeControl?
Here is relatively simple tutorial on creating a custom WebControl:
Create ASP.NET Server Controls from Scratch
And here some more advanced example from MSDN:
Developing Custom ASP.NET Server Controls
It depends if you will be using it in other solutions really. If you are, then if might make more sense to create a new widgets solution with each widget in its own user control and compile it into an assembly.
Then you just reference that assembly and use it in your markup.
If your widget is only going to be used in a single solution then I wouldn't bother with the above. Just create a user control in the same solution.
As opposite of some answers, you should create user controls with embedded resources.
It is complex to do it, but once you do you will be able to develop controls like RadControls from Telerik.
If you open up their controls you will see that they are all embedded resources on the Telerik.Web.UI.dll.
Here is an old answer of mine that shows how to load the control and how to handle embedded resources (virtual path provider)
Unless you have a good reason to do so (like creating a generic control as a calendar, grid or something like that) don't go this way, it is dark, complex... But as you can see it might be worth it, Telerik.Web.UI is the live example that this can work out.
I have written a data browsing library that is being used in several projects. The library or component includes some classes as well as some ASPX pages.
Until now, we copy all the files into each project to reuse it, with the obvious drawbacks and updating nightmares. I want to encapsulate all the library into a component that the projects can use.
What's the best way to do it? I know I can create a DLL, but I think it's only for the classes, don't know how to go with the ASPXs pages.
We are using Visual Studio 2008 and Framework 2.0
Thanks in advance
This is a perfect case for custom controls.
Change the pages into user controls, and embed the new user controls back into pages that have nothing in them but the reference to the user control.
Once that works, you can change the user controls into server controls, little by little. They will be composite controls, as the user control already is.
There's a trick you can use at this stage: I'm not recalling the details this late at night, but someone else will fill those in: when ASP.NET compiles a page, it first "compiles" the markup into source code, then compiles the source code. You can get ASP.NET to not delete the temporary source files. That allows you to copy into your project code that creates precisely the same HTML as the user control did.
The difference will be - it's now your code and you can refactor it as much as you like, or even include it in a custom control library.