Scenario:
I have a pretty standard master page for all my pages. It includes the usual login forms and other dynamic lists to be extracted on each page. Webdesigners can already modify the central content place holder of each page. But still, the design and layout for the master page is still in my project and any modification to the design must be made in Visual Studio and the project re-compiled and re-deployed.
What is the best way to provide near-full access to designing the master page through a CMS? Some of the problems I can identify is the inclusion of any dynamic lists or specific controls such as a login form.
Thanks.
Unless you want to host your content within a portal I don't know of a perfect answer to this.
If the bits they design just amount to look and feel for the page then this can be controlled by css and you could allow them to create themes using different css files.
This is indeed an interesting question, and there is no perfect solution. I worked for an ecommerce shop with this issue, and frankly, I just asked the designers in many cases to provide me there html and css, then I would grab the html pieces and css and add them to my project. Yes this was tedious....
Then we we built a cms where the designers could copy and paste their html into html editors, and we would store those pieces of html in a database. My web app would grab those from the database at run time. This solve some issues, but not all, since it did not give them complete control of the design of the web page.
The bottom line is you need to standard as to how the designer will submit their work to you. If you have that, and you can count on the html and css, then you can star to think of possibly building a CMS around that. In this days of RAD, I have found it easier to just work with the html and css delivered to me and simply copy and paste the pieces into my master page and other pages as needed.
While this is not a CMS answer, you do have the ability to allow designers to open the master pages in Expression Web. I will not say it is the greatest tool in the world, but I have had designers work up the master page designs in Expression with good results.
There is a pain point, however. If the entire project is opened, the designer will see the code behind files as separate items, not like the treeview view seen in Visual Studio.
I imagine you could have the master page checked out for use with Expression through a CMS, but there is no built in way to do this, nor do I know of a third party tool to do this. Hopefully Expression Web 3 will make things easier.
If you have a CMS, you may be better to give it full control over page content. If there are things the CMS cannot do, you could look to write extensions or plugin modules for the CMS that your designers can then drop onto the page in the CMS's page editor.
If your CMS doesn't support plugin modules, you may be trying to force both the CMS and master pages to do things they were not intended to do.
If the above doesn't work in your situation, here's another thought: place inline frames on your master page that host pages that are edited in the CMS.
Hope that helps.
Would it be possible for you to put placeholders in the Master Page in place of the areas that designers should be allowed to edit? Since Master Pages are only editable in Visual Studio, it may be your only feasible option at this point in time. One problem with this approach is that the content put in the placeholders is unlikely to be valid, since you would probably have tags left open in one placeholder and closed in another.
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
<asp:PlaceHolder ID="headerContent" runat="server"></asp:PlaceHolder>
</head>
<body>
<asp:PlaceHolder ID="beforeContent" runat="server"></asp:PlaceHolder>
<asp:PlaceHolder ID="centralContent" runat="server"></asp:PlaceHolder>
<asp:PlaceHolder ID="afterContent" runat="server"></asp:PlaceHolder>
</body>
</html>
I know it's ugly, but it might give you the control you need (as long as you don't mind the XHTML validator warning you all the time). What you put in the placeholders could be your user controls or literal content or whatever, but you'd have to load it dynamically.
Thoughts?
EDIT: This won't work. The PlaceHolder is going to render <div> tags that would mess things up. Maybe you could extend PlaceHolder and override how it renders its HTML.
Interesting question,
been dabbling in that area myself a while ago.
How knowledgeable are these web designers when not in the realm of not-inside-Photoshop-or-flash?
If using a DIY-CMS, perhaps you can template the most susceptible objects, e. g. making a generic (as in whatever you feel like, not whatever they feel like ;-)) list and a way of entering design, if applicable.
As long as you have a thorough framework set up, that deals with the attributes available to the designers through the CMS, there shouldn't be any need for recompiling... but of course, I can easily see a developer (read : me) stumbling
into the gap of nitty-pitty-perfection....
I'm afraid the easiest, and only manageable, path is to standardize how the designers express their needs&wants to you...it just won't code itself...
Could you provide some examples?
Well, with a Web Application Project pages are not compiled until accessed (link is 2005 but it still applies). This means that the actual .aspx (and .ascx etc) page is deployed in its original state. A designer can update the format of the page on the server and the updates will be compiled the next time someone requests that content.
It would be relatively trivial to allow designers to download the current pages and upload replacements through your website's UI. However, it isn't very secure (and probably should never be done). It would be better to allow designers access to the virtual directory over the web so they can connect to it using a tool such as Expression Web. This way the designer can open the current website, edit pages, and push the results directly into production (scary tho that thought may be).
As I'm getting downvoted for having a correct answer, let me point out something.
Website projects compile codebehind and pages on demand. If you need to update code regularly, its an okay solution.
Web application projects can be configured to be updatable. All codebehind and classes are compiled into an assembly, and all aspx, ascx, etc pages are deployed and compiled on demand. This means that a designer can connect to the website, update the layout and static content, and see the changes on the next request.
This is my preferred method of deployment. I have a few web application projects out there in the wild, with updatable aspx files deployed alongside my dll. The idea being that users of the website can alter the UI without having to submit updates to me so I can recompile it for them.
a .master is just a text file. They can edit it however they like. There's certainly nothing they'd do to it that would require you to recompile the code just to view it. That's the big win with Master Pages in the first place: designers and other non-programmers can edit them manually without breaking anything.
Give them access to the file under source control and let them go nuts.
Related
We're building a Kentico 8.2 site using ASPX+portal model. Looking at the rendered HTML on my live site I can see a lot of unnecessary Javascript that Kentico has dumped into my page. What's more this is occurring at the top of my page at the top of the form element.
For example, it's rendering the ASP.NET __doPostBack JS function even though I'm not using any controls that require it. Other scripts are being added as WebResource.axd and ScriptResource.axd includes.
At a glance it would seem these scripts constitute the Microsoft AJAX framework used with UpdatePanel etc. My assumption is that they are there to add portal manager functionality when using the page in the Kentico UI. Presumably they are also used with certain built-in web parts.
However, I am only using custom web parts on my live site so all these scripts are doing nothing and are just slowing down my page and causing poor performance testing results.
I've tried hiding the <ajaxToolkit:ToolkitScriptManager /> and <cms:CMSPortalManager /> controls on my master page when rendering the live site, but this causes templates that have a <cms:CMSWebPartZone /> to break.
Does anyone know how to ensure this bloat is removed when not required? Or at the very least cause these scripts to be rendered at the end of the page so they don't interfere with performance too much?
Unfortunately, building sites within Kentico using ASPX and ASPX+Portal Pages will automatically generate additional markup such as __doPostBack, WebResource.axd and ScriptResource.axd.
I wouldn't recommend removing any of the default code in your Masterpage. This will cause things to break (as you've experienced).
However, having this markup in place shouldn't cause a massive issue in page performance. Understandably, this isn't ideal.
What I do to lessen the hit is the following:
Disable the ViewState wherever possible. For example, either at Page Template or Webpart/User control level.
Move the ViewState to the bottom of the page (in Kentico Settings), so the page is less "top heavy".
Ensure you are caching everything you can. For example, site furniture used by your webparts and templates (images/js etc) at IIS level and at Kentico level using their API.
Reading this article from the Kentico documentation provides some more information in greater depth: Optimizing website performance
If you really want "full control" over the HTML rendered, Kentico does allow you to create templates using MVC. But this won't give you the flexibility to modify Page Templates by moving around web parts within the CMS Administration. I presume you have chosen the Portal Page approach for this very reason.
I hope this helps.
In addition to #sbhomra's great answer I have a few questions, suggestions and comments.
How many seconds or milliseconds are you talking about with performance? If you think you'll gain a few milliseconds back, it's not worth your effort to try to rebuild all the functionality. If you're talking a second or two, there about 15 different things you can change within settings and your code to gain it all back. Think about how much code you're going to write, maintain and upgrade just to gain a second or less back?
The WebResource and SciptResource load resources that are compiled into libraries within the website. So if someone created an external library and that library was loading an image that was compiled into it, you'd get that WebResource.axd reference on your site. You'd have to physically remove those libraries from the Kentico instance.
Although I don't recommend it strictly because you lose so much functionality and have so much extra unnecessary code, MVC will give you the control you're looking for.
I have been tasked with creating a small website using SharePoint 2010 Site Pages via SharePoint Designer. I am bringing over my favorite html template, which loads and runs as expected (mostly), but I quickly ran into the following problem.
I typically use PHP to inject certain data into my page by reading directly from a local file. I have no experience with ASP, which appears to be the only method to accomplish this. I have searched the docs and so many sites but haven't found a clear-cut way to do this, and now my head is spinning. Can anyone help me with a simple process for reading a file into the middle of my html file as it gets served?
For example:
<html>
<body>
Here's my title
<inject file contents here>
Here's my footer
</body>
</html>
Thanks all, any help will be much appreciated!
You cannot do this out of the box. You will have to create a customised solution to do this, by implementing a custom controls for instance.
When you start using Sharepoint you need to change your mindset about whatever you used before. Believe me you don't want to pick a fight with Sharepoint, because the beast will win.
back to your problem I think you should be looking at Reusable Content.
Here is a description about it:
http://en.share-gate.com/blog/sharepoint-reusable-content-a-forgotten-beauty
Basically you have a list where you manage all your reusable content bits (sort of like your files).
And then in the Rich text editor for the page content you can then insert a snippet that inject your reusable content.
if the content changes all the places you are using the reusable content bits will also change.
So this behaviour is pretty much the same you get if using a file. Except it's the SharePoint Way.
Good luck
Past, now irrelevant back story: I was trying to make some changes to BlueBand and get 'up and running pretty quickly' but after looking at it further this is no longer an option due to tables that a previous developer introduced into the layout. I'll have to live with this and make what tweaks I can.
So, looking towards future greenfields projects...
Are there any recommendations for CSS frameworks that work nicely with SharePoint publishing sites? (Examples are BluePrint, YUI.) They should not interfere with standard out-of-the-box controls such as the Site Actions menu, rich text editor, and publishing toolbar.
Real world experiences welcomed, please!
What would you like to use a CSS framework for? As far as I can tell you could use one for making a cross-browser reset but everything else just depends on your layout. If you're planning to throw out the standard SharePoint layout it means that you need to start from scratch. The good news is that it's not much different than creating a layout for any other website. There are some things you need (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa660698.aspx) while working with SharePoint but as for CSS it's all up to you.
Heather Solomon has a great blog/guide on wiring up SharePoint CSS classes - take a look:
http://www.heathersolomon.com/content/sp07cssreference.htm
Cheers,
Adam
You will run into a lot of trouble trying to hack the blue band theme into a table less layout.
You may get some mileage from the free Accesibility Kit for Sharepoint.
It comes with layout pages, CSS and even control adapters for those who care about the HTML of thier site.
Still, getting rid of the tables produced by SharePoint is not really compatible with "up and running pretty quickly"
You should start with the minimal masterpage. That will be the masterpage that's connected to the publishing layouts. You can then add in all the html/css you desire to your masterpage and layouts to make them look like anything you want.
If the users who are browsing those same publishing pages also need access to your list forms (new,edit,display) you will have to edit those files and attach them to your masterpage (either through SP Designer or a Feature to do it automatically). Or, customize the application masterpage to be nearly the same as your publishing masterpage and deploy them both as a feature with an HTTP Handler that changes the masterpage for the application.master at runtime.
Also an FYI, there are many issues once you start customizing list form pages for a site accessible to anon users, so do your research first on that one if needed.
We have used 960.gs with some success. Just include it in your master page, and wrap the main content area with a - or use container_12/container_24. Then in your individual page layouts, you can leverage all the columns/push/pull/alpha/omega goodies that make 960 so great. This works in 2007 and 2010, just takes a bit more work in 2007.
You can use any framework you desire when working with Sharepoint, however, the primary concern is how much control you have over web parts. OOB web parts use table based layout. If you have full control over how the web parts use the markup they product then you are one step closer to using a framework with little headache.
To alleviate some of the table based layout used in web parts you can look at accessibility toolkits to convert the web parts appropriately.
Our organization has dedicated designers who design the page and cut it up in Dreamweaver. That's worked well in the past with ASP and PHP sites. Now we're trying to make it work with .NET, but are struggling because of the structure of a project in ASP.NET. How does everybody collaborate with developers? The specific points I am looking for are:
-Transferring Dreamweaver content to Visual Studio
-Changing HTML inputs to server controls
-Giving designer access to finished Visual Studio product so they can tweak layout
Thanks!
Obviously, there will be a slight learning curve for your designers. But with that said, I have worked quite often with designers (none of whom used Dreamweaver, btw, so that may be part of the problem) on asp.net sites. Usually, they will create the HTML exactly how they want it on the server like a static HTML page, then I will go in and replace form fields manually with asp.net controls.
On an aside, I have found that I have the best chance of matching the design using controls that spit out the least HTML, such as Repeaters instead of DataGrids.
Once the site is up on the server and programmed, they can go back in an tweak things if need be.
Also, just like we have to adapt to them a bit (making our server controls spit out html how they like it) they also have to adapt to us a bit and not rely as heavily on id attributes in their stylesheets as some items id attributes will be controlled by hte .net runtime since they are controls.
MOre often than not, a designer new to asp.net will feel very threatened by this new way of doing things, specially with user controls instad of include files, but its really not that different than classic asp/php development is.
The key to the solution of all your problems in this matter is quite simple, and yet so hard to fulfill: it's usually called semantic markup. If you can make sure that the designers to start with make their html semantic, and that the .Net programmers keep rendering the same markup but with their server controls where needed, the tweaking won't be a problem - the markup is the same.
So what is semantic html, then? you may ask. Well, it's not always as simple as one would like it to be. A good start is to make every page pass XHTML validation.
In my experience, designer-created HTML almost always needs to be at least refactored, if not rewritten. So, open a browser with the original HTML on the left, and try to match it as closely as possible in VS on the right screen.
Giving designers access to ASP markup is not a good idea, imho. Too much can go wrong if you only understand half of the tags you are manipulating.
How about using one of Microsoft Expressions line of products? I've heard they are to .NET what dreamweaver is to PHP/ASP.
I wonder what the best practice for this scenario is:
I have a Sharepoint Site (MOSS2007) with an ASPX Page on it. However, I cannot use any inline source and stuff like Event handlers do not work, because Sharepoint does not allow Server Side Script on ASPX Pages per default.
Two solutions:
Change the PageParserPath in web.config as per this site
<PageParserPaths>
<PageParserPath VirtualPath="/pages/test.aspx"
CompilationMode="Always" AllowServerSideScript="true" />
</PageParserPaths>
Create all the controls and Wire them up to Events in the .CS File, thus completely eliminating some of the benefits of ASP.net
I wonder, what the best practice would be? Number one looks like it's the correct choice, but changing the web.config is something I want to use sparingly whenever possible.
So in that case I would wrap it up in a feature and deploy it via a solution. This way I think you will avoid the issue you are seeing. This is especially useful if you plan to use this functionality within other sites too.
You can also embed web parts directly in the page, much like you do a WebControl, thereby avoiding any gallery clutter.
What does the ASPX page do? What functionality does it add? How are you adding the page into the site? By the looks of it this is just a "Web Part Page" in a document library.
I would have to do a little research to be 100%, but my understanding is that inline code is ok, providing it's in a page that remains ghosted, and thereby trusted. Can you add your functionality into the site via a feature?
I would avoide option 1, seems like bad advice to me. Allowing server side code in your page is a security risk as it then becomes possible for someone to inject malicious code. Sure you can secure the page, but we are talking remote execution with likely some pretty serious permissions.
Thanks so far. I've successfully tried Andrew Connel's solution:
http://www.andrewconnell.com/blog/articles/UsingCodeBehindFilesInSharePointSites.aspx
Wrapping it into a solution is part of that, but the main problem was how to get the code into that, and it's more leaning towards Option 2 without having to create the controls in code.
What I was missing:
In the .cs File, it is required to manually add the "protected Button Trigger;" stuff, because there is no automatically generated .designer.cs file when using a class library.
Well, it's a page that hosts user controls. It's a custom .aspx Page that will be created on the site, specially because I do not want to create WebParts.
It's essentially an application running within Sharepoint, utilizing Lists and other functions, but all the functionality is only useful within the application, so flooding the web part gallery with countless web parts that only work in one place is something i'd like to avoid.