Is there a built-in control that is close to an application bar at the bottom of Facebook, or is such a function only available through the use of JavaScript/AJAX?
Remember that ASP.NET is server-side, so it controls all processing that takes place before the web page even reaches the user. For functionality like what you're talking about, you need browser-side voodoo like Javascript. So...
Javascript is practically required.
The only other feasible alternative would be Flash.
XML would not be necessary (or even necessarily desirable).
Don't fall into the trap of calling all asynchronous, Javascript-driven behavior "AJAX", because much of it isn't.
I just built something like this in ASP.NET. I recently posted a blog on how to do it. Check out how to build a Facebook Application Bar in ASP.NET.
I used two controls from ComponentOne to help out, the C1Menu control and the C1ToolTip control
I imagine you mean this:
Screenshot: http://screencast.com/t/kqFPArcmYQ
Video: http://screencast.com/t/X6IczIIv
If that's the case, no, it cannot be done with ASP.NET alone. You are correct in assuming it would require javascript, and possibly some AJAX to make those asynchronous calls.
You should look into javascript libraries, such as jQuery & jQuery UI, or MooTools, etc. Those give you a breadth of tools and plugins to create wonderful/dynamic UIs.
http://jquery.com/
(jQuery UI Demos)
http://mootools.net/
(MooTools Demos)
Check out the demos on their pages, to see if those will fit your idea. You can definitely build the core of the menu in ASP.Net, and then use a javascript library to get the dynamic feel that you're looking for.
Hope that helps a little bit.
Related
i'm not sure how to call that. i'm looking for some samples guiding me how to implement a automatic page extend. i'm mean something like the friends list on facebook. first only a few friends are loaded. after you scroll down, some others get loaded.
thx in advance
The solution to your problem relies more on AJAX then anything else.
I suggest using jQuery Ajax, and here is a nice article that will get you started with calling ASP.NET web services via client side script.
enter link description here
If you don't have experience using ajax this will probably be a lot for you to grasp. Especially if you're going to dive in with a feature like you described above.
Edit: It may be more practical to use a plugin to achieve this:
scrolling jQuery plugin
We are planning to extend an existing ASP.NET application (a real huge one) to have a slicker UI. One of the requiremnents is to have a way to execute server side code without a postback (As an example, say a user clicks on a link or hovers on a link, a popup comes up which executes server side code or makes calls to the database)
We plan to add more functionality that closely aligns with the behavior of a yahoo or a google customized page.
Is UpdatePanels a way to go or should a lot of it be implemented using JavaScript? One of the main requirements is to keep the pages as light as possible and to have good performance. We don't plan on using any 3rd party components.
What technologies are suggested that will help us add UI heavy features in the future?
Edit: Thanks everyone. It appears that the approach to take is to use a JS library such as JQuery and AJAX (from initial research the PageMethod/WebMethod way of doing it)?
Any more suggestions?
I think that UpdatePanels are actually pretty clunky. (Actually, I think ASP.NET is pretty clunky now that I've moved to ASP.NET MVC). If the page is going to be highly interactive, I'd suggest using some sort of javascript framework, like jQuery, Dojo, MooTools, etc. that will allow you to do AJAX easily as well as manage the user experience client-side. MS is distributing jQuery with Visual Studio and has promised to support it, so you might want to consider that when making your decision.
Stephen Walter did a great talk about the next version of ASP.NET Ajax 4.0. It's not an immediate solution but it's interesting to see where Microsoft is going with their Ajax framework.
There's a lot more to ASP.NET AJAX than the UpdatePanel, and a fair amount of it can be done without heavy JavaScript work. UpdatePanel is quite inefficient in terms of the amount of data send over the wire. As with everything, only optimise when you need - but bear in mind that the UpdatePanel is one of the first places to look for your slowdowns.
Just to give you a different answer than everybody else: why not try silverlight?
Not sure if this belongs in community wiki...
Can somebody give some general guidelines on how to successfully build an ASP.NET site that isn't dependent on JavaScript? My understanding is that I should build a functional site initially without JavaScript, and use it to enhance the user experience. That is easier said than done... how can I make sure my site works without JavaScript short of disabling JavaScript and trying it? Or is this something that comes with experience?
Try ASP.NET MVC! sure most of the examples use JavaScript for the AJAX functionality, but it's easy to build a fully functioning site that doesn't use JavaScript.
Since ASP.NET MVC doesn't use server controls with all their embedded JavaScript, it's a great way to build a site with very minimal and lightweight HTML, while still writting your data access and business logic in C#, VB.NET, or any other .NET language.
I've built working ASP.Net sites with little or no JavaScript, so it's definitely possible (just a royal pain.) The trick, and this sounds silly, is to use as few <ASP:> type tags as possible. Those all spawn various levels of JavaScript. Regular old-school HTML elements work just fine with no scripting.
So, on the extreme end, you write, say, your form using all plain-vanilla HTML elements, and then you have that form submit point at another page that accepts the form submit and hands it off to your server-side scripting.
To put it another way, pretend that all you get with ASP.NET is a snazzy server-side programming language and you're writing HTML in 1998.
Now, having done this, I can tell you that what this ends up as is a classic ASP webpage with cleaner programming syntax. ;) Most of the features that make ASP.NET "better" than classic ASP hang on JavaScript, so writing a JavaScript-free ASP.NET system is an exercise in shooting oneself in the foot repeatedly.
However, the one thing you should absolutely do is make sure the first page or two do work without JavaScript. Unlike 10 years ago you can safely assume that any browser hitting your page has JavaScript, and unlike about 8 years ago, your visitors probably don't have JavaScript turned off for speed reasons, but they very well might have something like the NoScript plugin for Firefox dialed all the way to 11. So, your first couple of pages need to work well enough to a) tell the new visitor that they need JavaScript, and b) still look and work good enough to make it look like adding your site to the white list is worth it. (In my experience, most people get the first one done, but in such as way as to totally drop the ball on the second. To put it another way - if your super fancy web 2.0 mega site starts looking like craigslist if noScript is fired up, I'm probably not going to bother letting you run scripts on my machine.)
If you want to use many of the ASP.NET controls (i.e. the DataGridView), ASP.NET pages are generated with lots of JavaScript in order to handle the events on the controls (i.e. selecting a row in the DataGridView). I think you're going to lose so much of ASP.NET that trying to have ASP.NET work without JavaScript enabled is impractical.
Disabling Javascript is the best way to test how a web site performs with out it. Good news, IE8's developer tools provide a quick and easy way to do just that. Now, having said that, often times the only thing that you can do is put up a message with a noscript tag to the effect that your site requires javascript for best function.
Many ASP.NET functionalities & controls won't work when JavaScript has been disabled. Think of LinkButton's onclick event which contains a call to a JavaScript function.
LinkButton is just an example. But there are many other things too.
If your concern is with JavaScript being disabled in user's browser then you can check for that and handle your site accordingly.
If you do decide to build the site without JavaScript then you will end up building a somewhat static web site. If your need is just to build a static website then you can go on with this approach.
Write everything with basic html forms and css, and then you will know that it works without javascript.
Once you are happy with it, then look at unobtrusive javascript, so you can modify the way the application works when javascript is enabled.
Last time I looked at some stats about this around 1% disable JavaScript, so why spend hours and hours on this when what you should do is show a message telling the user that your site requires javascript.
Use your time to be productive instead of trying to write around perceived limitations.
I've seen a few blog posts and tutorials overviewing mixing in jQuery and the UI elements for Views in a .NET MVC web app. But usually targeted at developers with a comprehensive grasp of the full dev cycle and variations of back/middle tier technologies.
As the front end developer I'm pitching a jQuery-only UI to the back-end dev - he cautions against a non-webforms interface for sake of the code maturity pov.
I'm trying to hit back with "well...it's your pattern ...isn't it elemental to MVC? No logic in the view? I'm reading that to be 'server-side stuff'. You just serialize the properties i'm asking for, or better...let me easily discover what you _can send me...i'll be able to implement the UI via jQuery UI."
So how valid is my position?
Can jQuery's grid be expected to handle at least the bottom 85% of .net's native control (low-to-moderate capacities # of rows)?
How about in-line editing? ...from the grid?
Would working exclusively in Web Services simplify his life at all? and if so, wouldn't that be logical way to build a .net-to-jQuery relationship? - ajax liaisoning twixt server (.net WS methods) and client?
mny thx
--steve...
Don't fight the platform. That way lies pain and suffering.
The MVC view objects are vastly different than asp.net webforms with server controls--you get straight up html. You get jquery and ajax basically for free, with (almost) magic server side ajax call processing.
They are designed to do what you ask. Writing your own jquery ui is reinventing the wheel.
Not only would it be a ton of extra work for no gain. You would be the only developer around trying to do that, and when you needed help, few could offer advice.
If this is an admin interface, and the client has agreed that users must have javascript enabled then I think using javascript to build widgets on the page is a better option than using the asp.net server controls. If however this is a public facing website I would argue that a pure html and css approach is much better, and then use javascript to progressively enhance the page!
Now I dont ever advocate using asp.net server controls, because they spit out poor markup and they are overly complicated to use. Instead I have been using jQuery to do the grunt work and dom querying and traversing. I also dont advocate using jQuery UI because they are missing some very essential widgets, for example no datatable, no treeview etc. I know that there are lots of plugins for jQuery but they are not componentised and therefore each plugin needs to reinvent the wheel to achieve everything it needs. Once you have included all your plugin libraries and css you often end up with a very large page footprint. Also each plugin often has a different home page and documentation that may or may not be up to scratch.
I think that the best UI library is YUI, and you can easily combine it with jQuery. Because each widget is made up from core components the overall weight of download is smaller. Also you have all the documentation in one place with 100's of working examples. Also it means working with the same set of javascript patterns across the board, so with each widget you learn more and more about the library. Hopefully jQuery UI will catch up, but personally I am looking forward to YUI 3 which for me might mean dropping jQuery altogether...
jQuery is a very mature library. It is used by thousands of people across the internet, and I dont think I have ever encountered a bug. YUI is dogfooded by YAHOO so it too is battle hardened.
One thing I did not mention to you is that I am using the default webforms view engine with asp.net mvc. I think it is still the best option as you get intellisense and also Resharper refactoring even searches your views, and the static solution anaylsis can find code errors in your views.
For building my markup I have been using MvcContrib Fluent Html but you could also checkout this article that advocated the DRY principal very well.
I chose AjaxToolKit to build a WebForm login. Has anyone else had problems trying to do this? I'm planning to use DropShadow Extender and RoundedCorners with Panels, but this is my first time working with panels.
Please check this link.
I want to put a login panel into something like the screenshot shows, whenever the user clicks a button. This would be similar functionality to what happens on StackOverflow when you try to insert an image or hyperlink in 'ask a question'. Is this possible? How much effort is it?
If you are talking about 100% using ajax control toolkit, check out the ModalPanel example.
You could also go for a javascript library option like iBox, which would be a bit harder to integrate, but not much.
I much prefer doing this manually with javascript and css, if you know what you are doing it is not that hard, if you aren't familiar with those technologies it may take more work. Here is a good post that walks you through the basics
I use AjaxControlToolkit extensively in my application and its really simple.Being server side ajax I does emit a lot of javascript on your page. I suggest you use AJAX only where its required i.e. in cases where a page does lots of things and you want to make it more responsive something like a Dashboard kind of app.