I have developed a ASP.NET MVC application. I have a conroller with the name EmployeeController and it got a method called GetEmployeeByName. GetEmployeeByName() takes a name of type string as parameter.
So When I send a request like this, i get the data back :
someDomain:9999/Employee/GetEmployeeByName/Roger Federer
But if the name contains an '&' (you & me), I get a '400 Bad Request' as response from server.
someDomain:9999/Employee/GetEmployeeByName/you%20&%20me
Even if i encode it dont get a reposne back
someDomain:9999/Employee/GetEmployeeByName/you%20&%20me
What is the right way to encode such (data with special character) data?
What is the right way to encode such (data with special character) data?
The right way is to use a query string parameter and not be putting those things as part of the uri portion. Read the following blog post from Scott Hansleman. I will only quote hos conclusion:
After ALL this effort to get crazy stuff in the Request Path, it's
worth mentioning that simply keeping the values as a part of the Query
String (remember WAY back at the beginning of this post?) is easier,
cleaner, more flexible, and more secure.
As you can see in the blog post there are some hacky ways to make it work and circumvent IIS handling but it simply is not something that I would recommend you venturing into. Just put this name in the query string.
Related
How do I clear/remove query string parameters, which my MVC action, doesn't require/support?
For instance, my action requires, say an id and a bool flag, so the url would be something like: http://localhost:someport/controller/action/?id=1&remove=true
But, if a user types in something like, http://localhost:someport/controller/action/?id=1&remove=true&some-junk-param=0
Then, I want the some-junk-param to be removed and not shown in the address bar, when the request is processed.
Any thoughts?
If you need to get rid of unwanted query string parameters, you have two general options:
Do it on server-side. You can achive this only with redirection, that means when browser asks URL with bad query string, server redirects browser to URL with good query string.
Caveats:
In this case we have redundant query just for cleaning query string.
User will have trash in browser history.
Do it on client-side. ASP.NET MVC Model binder will get only expected parameters from query string, so it's nothing bad with having other values in query string. You can check your URL on client-side with javascript and rewrite it with or without changing history using History API (IE10+).
Caveats:
In this case you will have to support consistency about allowed parameters between JS and C# code
Of course every way is suitable for it's own cases, but looking at caveats the second way is better, because it affects developer expirience whereas first way affects user expirience.
I have a rails 3 app and now i implementing filter for my catalog. Filters form pass data to controller through GET request. As a result i have link like this in my browser after i submit
my form (apply search):
http://localhost:3001/shoes?filter%5BShoeBottomType%5D%5B%5D=2&filter%5BShoeClassification%5D%5B%5D=1&filter%5BShoeClassification%5D%5B%5D=2&filter%5BShoeElation%5D%5B%5D=3&filter%5BShoeElation%5D%5B%5D=4&filter%5BShoeElation%5D%5B%5D=5&filter%5BShoeLiningColor%5D%5B%5D=2&filter%5BShoeLiningColor%5D%5B%5D=3&filter%5BShoeLiningColor%5D%5B%5D=4&filter%5BShoeTopColor%5D%5B%5D=1&filter%5BShoeTopColor%5D%5B%5D=2&filter%5Bonly_action%5D%5B%5D=1&page=2
Is there a way to do URL more beautiful?
PS i dont want use POST request, because I read that it is bad for SEO
TLDR: just leave it.
HTML forms serialize in a straightforward manner; the parameters are named after the HTML elements. The actual issue here is how the form elements are named. It looks like they have names like filter[ShoeBottomType][]; look into your HTML to see the name attributes. Since you're in Rails, I'm guessing you having a filter hash passed to your Rails controller method as a single argument, and since Rails expects hashes to use a certain URL format for hashes and arrays (it has to know how to deserialize it from the request), the form helper writes the form that way. And yours is especially complicated because the hash values are arrays, hence the extra set of brackets. Then it's URL encoded and you end up with an ugly mess.
You could avoid some of this problem by passing the inputs individually back to the controller instead of as a big hash. Something like:
def index
shoe_bottom_types = params[:bottom_types]
shoe_classifications = params[:classifications]
shoe_elations = params[:elations]
...
which will get you to: /shoes?bottomTypes[]=1&bottomTypes[]=2.... That doesn't seem much better, and now your controller is all gross. And I don't see how you're going to get rid of the brackets entirely if you want to have more than one of the same filter. I guess you could get crazy and do your own parsing in your controller, like breaking apart shoeBottomTypes=1|2, but then you'll have to do your own form serialization too. Again, just not worth it.
Backing up for a sec, the SEO stuff doesn't make much sense. Search engines won't fill out your form; they just follow links. The real reason you should use GET is that (presumably), submitting your form doesn't have side effects, since it's just a search. See here; it's important to use the right HTTP methods. If you use POST, you'll get weird warnings on reloads and you won't be able to bookmark the search.
Backing up even further, why do you care, especially now that SEO is out of the picture? Just as a quick demo, I did a google search for the word "thing" and this was the URL:
https://www.google.com/#hl=en&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=thing&pbx=1&oq=thing&aq=f&aqi=g2g-s1g1&aql=1&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=764l1877l0l1980l6l6l0l0l0l0l89l432l5l5l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=220ef4545fdef788&biw=1920&bih=1086
So URLs for form submissions can be long. The user won't even look at it.
The only possibility I can think of for why you'd care about the length/ugliness of your URL here is that you want, separately from the form, to create links to certain searches. There are several ways to handle that, but since I don't know whether that's relevant to you, I'll let that be a follow-up.
So bottom line, it looks like I'd expect, and trying to fix it sounds ugly and pointless.
If you do not want to use a POST request, then there is no other way then to put the form values in the URL -- they have to get to the server one way or another.
On the other hand however, I do not see why doing a POST would be bad for SEO and I would love to see the article that stated so.
My suggestion is that you could add some custom routes to beautify your urls.
For example :
http://localhost:3001/shoes/Type/2/Classification/1,2/Elation/3,4,5/LiningColor/2,3,4/TopColor/1,2/only_action/1/page/2
This is far much shorter than your initial URL ;)
The counterpart is that, as far as I know, you have to use always the same order for params in your url.
The routing rule is the following :
match "shoes/Type/:type/Classification/:classification/Elation/:elation/LiningColor/:liningcolor/TopColor/:topcolor/only_action/:only_action/page/:page" => "shoes#show"
You can retrieve the passed values in params array. You have to split the string containing , in order to retrieve the multiple values.
I'm considering using the hash method to create static urls to content that is managed by ajax calls in a Asp.Net MVC. The proof of concept i'm working on is a profile page /user/profile where one can browse and edit different sections. You could always ask for the following url /user/profile#password to access directly to you profile page, in the change password section
However, i'm wondering if i'm not starting this the bad way, since apparently i can't access the part after the hash in any way, except by declaring a route value for the hash in global.asax. So i'm wondering if this is the right way to access this part of the url?
Am i supposed to declare a route value, or is there another way to work with hash values (a framework, javascript or mvc)?
Edited to add:
In pure javascript, i have no problem using the window.location.hash property, i'm not sure though how standard it is in today's browsers, hence the question about a javascript framework/plugin that would use it.
The thing is that the part that follows the hash (#) is never sent to the server into the HTTP request so the server has absolutely no way of reading it. So no need to waste time in searching for something that doesn't exist.
You could on the other hand tune your routes to generate links that contain the hash part so that client scripts can read it.
Send the hash value document.location.hash as a parameter to the controller action of your choice.
This can be done in the code if needed...
RedirectResult(Url.Action("profile") + "#password");
should work fine
I'm working on an API that accepts data from remote clients, some of which where the key in an HTTP POST almost functions as an array. In english what this means is say I have a resource on my server called "class". A class in this sense, is the type a student sits in and a teacher educates in. When the user submits an HTTP POST to create a new class for their application, a lot of the key value pairs look like:
student_name: Bob Smith
student_name: Jane Smith
student_name: Chris Smith
What's the best way to handle this on both the client side (let's say the client is cURL or ActiveResource, whatever..) and what's a decent way of handling this on the server-side if my server is a Ruby on Rails app? Need a way to allow for multiple keys with the same name and without any namespace clashing or loss of data.
My requirement has to be that the POST data is urlencoded key/value pairs.
There are two ways to handle this, and it's going to depend on your client-side architecture how you go about doing it, as the HTTP standards do not make the situation cut and dry.
Traditionally, HTTP requests would simply use the same key for repeated values, and leave it up to the client architecture to realize what was going on. For instance, you could have a post request with the following values:
student_name=Bob+Smith&student_name=Jane+Smith&student_name=Chris+Smith
When the receiving architecture got that string, it would have to realize that there were multiple keys of student_name and act accordingly. It's usually implemented so that if you have a single key, a scalar value is created, and if you have multiples of the same key, the values are put into an array.
Modern client-side architectures such as PHP and Rails use a different syntax however. Any key you want to be read in as an array gets square brackets appended, like this:
student_name[]=Bob+Smith&student_name[]=Jane+Smith&student_name[]=Chris+Smith
The receiving architecture will create an array structure named "student_name" without the brackets. The square bracket syntax solves the problem of not being able to send an array with only a single value, which could not be handled with the "traditional" method.
Because you're using Rails, the square bracket syntax would be the way to go. If you think you might switch server-side architectures or want to distribute your code, you could look into more agnostic methods, such as JSON-encoding the string being sent, which adds overhead, but might be useful if it's a situation you expect to have to handle.
There's a great post on all this in the context of JQuery Ajax parameters here.
Send your data as XML or JSON and parse whatever you need out of it.
I have a set of actions that are returning time-series data with-in ranges specifiable to the minute.
They work fine with querystrings,
i.e.
/mycontroller/myaction?from=20091201 10:31&to=20091202 10:34
with or without URL encoded colons, but I thought it would be nice to have a pretty URL
/mycontroller/myaction/from-20091201 10:31/to-20091202 10:34
but this now strikes fear in the hear of IIS as it doesn't like colons in the URI so I get 'Bad Request' responses.
My question then, is what's a recommended/standard course of action to ensure I can keep the time in there?
Do I need to write a custom ModelBinder to parse my own datetime format? Should the actions just take strings for from and to and parse with a custom format eg "YYYYMMDD-HHmm". Can I specify a custom format somewhere? If so where? Or should I just give this up as folly and stick with querystring parameters?
Oh, and I see a lot of people go on about RESTful URLs; from what I've read there's nothing that says query strings aren't RESTful - it's more about appropriate use of existing HTTP action types.
You're right REST doesn't mean if it's its not in a folder structure its not REST.
The path structure is there to describe the resource. Querystrings can still be used to describe a filtered subset of such a resource. A date range fully qualifies as a filter criteria and should thus be perfectly RESTful being passed in as a querystring.