I am currently building an ASP.NET MVC site after years of being in the Web Forms world (and taking a bit of getting used to!).
I have an admin dashboard which has several area's contained in boxes which can be collapsed etc. The basic layout of the box is the same for all - the only difference is the content inside the box. I don't really want to repeat the box code over and over (talking only about front end code here). What I would normally do in the Web Forms world is create a control with template region for the content (i.e http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2006/06/04/Supporting-Templates-with-ASP.NET-User-Controls.aspx)
This question is pretty similar to my scenario How do build a composite or template control in ASP.Net MVC, or the equivelant?. The top answer in the referenced question points to this article http://jeffreypalermo.com/blog/asp-net-mvc-and-the-templated-partial-view-death-to-ascx/ which I guess would work but seems somewhat of a hack. What is the best way to achieve this in MVC? How do others handle this?
If the sharing is in the layout, use master (a concept from web forms).
If it is in the content then use Display/Editor Templates.
Related
I have a CMS website written in aspx 2.0 that allows users to build up pages by dropping controls on a page and setting properties (reflection on the server side) and events (client side js). The render engine knows what property to call on each control to find out what to save into the database. I went through all the pitfalls of control re-hydration and lack of proper ids on the controls and really struggled to make the solution SEO friendly which currently is partial at best. Also suffer from viewstate getting huge so I have started to look at MVC as a better way forwards for the next version. The final design of the page is only set when the user decides to promote it live, and may make many changes per day.
A typical page may have many textbox controls, radio button groups, checkbox groups, dropdownlists and images. Also we have a few of our own controls that we reflect at runtime into the solution.
From my initial research into MVC, this looks to have been written to avoid these types of issues and not try to hide the html which looks very promising as well as giving final markup that is much more cross browser friendly.
Now the question - since the requirements are to generate dynamic pages with dynamic html controls, is this a step too far for MVC and I should stick with ASPX, or is there a way to generate the dynamic content which would be suitable for a non technical person to be able to do?
Really appreciate any guidance before I jump in with both feet :)
Thanks
Mark
I'm assuming by aspx 2.0 you mean WebForms? It's really not a question of if MVC is capable of doing what you need - it is capable, and in
my opinion it's more capable. However There are some major differences between WebForms and MVC check out this post for more on that topic: MVC versus WebForms.
I hope this helps. Without more information on exactly what you're trying to accomplish, there's not much more I can say. Consider asking more specific questions with some code examples.
Some of the main advantages of MVC: Clean HTML, No ViewState written on the page, easier to support html5 and thus SEO as well.
For me, since I used MVC 3 years ago I don't even want to touch WebForms thesedays.
Btw, if you want CMS + MVC, why not use Orchard rather than building yourself?
http://paulmason.biz/?p=118
I need to port the functionality of this one and only one AJAX control to MVC, but given the poor selection of MVC controls out there, I think I need to bring this legacy control into the MVC world...
I'd rather not taint my MVC project with ASP.NET controls, and welcome json/MVC alternatives you know of. (post them if you know of any)
Sample UI that I need in ASP.NET MVC
Back to porting
Although it's unfortunate that I am left to porting this control to MVC, it seems to be a widely accepted practice since Telerik has detailed instructions on how do this.
That makes me ask:
How common is it for a MVC website to use ASP.NET controls?
Again I'll mention I don't want to do this so I welcome MVC-specific alternatives. That being said, I'll proceed with trying to merge that control with my existing site. </End Disclaimer>
If you click on this hyperlink, and look at the source code at the bottom, can you tell me where I should put the following in MVC?
Code behind (My first instinct is to use a Controller but another SO question indicates I should create a create a ViewName.aspx.cs file)
How do I port the SQLDataSource to the new "Model" way of thinking. I know they are different in nature but I don't know how to present data to a ASP.NET control in a way that it will consume the information.
How do I handle the AJAX component? This control has an AJAX component using callbacks. Yes this is getting ugly, but it seems like I have to do this.
Apparently this model saves data in session or view-state. I have no idea if this even work in MVC. Guidance, an alternate control, or a life preserver is much appreciated.
I've already done research and have instructions from Telerik here and here that describes how to get started with placing a simple menu, but I need a little assistance with the more complex controls like this one.
Note: For all the commentary that has hit this question, please remember that I only want this one ASP.NET control functionality; I can't find a comparable control in MVC.
porting from asp.net webforms to MVC is a paradigm shift.
Directly porting does not work.
The Model is where you typically describe your data and do the data access
the View is for displaying the data
The controller plums the other two together
So SQLDataSource is your data access layer and would therefore go to your model
the problem with the thought pattern of SQLDataSource == Model then you get away from the point of decoupling your presentation from data access
You have to think of MVC development as a new build
I would pick a book or video series from your preferred source and learn starting with MVC3 (it has some differences that simplify build speed and reinforce the difference between webforms and mvc)
Hope this helps.
This article explains how to run web forms and mvc together
http://weblogs.asp.net/rajbk/archive/2010/05/11/running-asp-net-webforms-and-asp-net-mvc-side-by-side.aspx
This is by telerik and explains the limitiation of the grid and what is need to get it to run.
http://blogs.telerik.com/aspnetmvcteam/posts/08-11-06/asp_net_ajax_controls_in_asp_net_mvc.aspx
Add an IFrame in your MVC view that just shows the WebForms page (or just use that control on a single WebForms page).
There is nothing that says you can't have a site with both WebForms and MVC pages. You can route a single URL to a WebForm just for this control.
Why not just use the telerik MVC controls? They work quite well. Either get them via a NuGet package or visit this link http://www.telerik.com/products/aspnet-mvc.aspx
I would rather use ViewModel instead of code behind
You don't have to throw away SqlDataSource you can use result set and buld from it your model, problem may be column names in result set... tricky but can be done
Since there is no components in MVC except helpers youll need help of jQuery probably, it easy
$.ajax({
url : "/controller/action",
data: { /*json or serialized form */ },
successs: function(data){
//if you got response as html from /controller/action
$("#some_div").html(data);
}
}
Session is available in MVC but viewstate not, you can use HttpContenxt.Cache or TempData if you need something like viewstate. USe TempData to keep data between redirections, or httpcontext.cache to cache your data further more.
I can't find similar functionality in an MVC control
MVC doesn't really have a concept of controls in the same way that ASP.Net does - there are only really the plain old HTML controls (i.e. hidden input, text input, checkbox, radiobuttons, select box, text area, password and buttons).
When you need something more complicated than the plain HTML Controls you need to use some JavaScript to achieve this.
I'm not sure that you will be able to 'port' the control into MVC - you will most likely have to try and re-create it your self using an MVC controller and a partial view with a fair bit of a javascript to create the control.
Have a look at the JQuery UI Autosomplete plugin - you could probably use this to acheive something similar
Ive been doing a bit of research / reading into mvc recently and was just wondering what the main purpose is.
is it as some people say to seperate the logic from the html
or to create clean url's
i could be missing the point completely, but asp.net forms really seperates the logic from the html and if you just want clean url's why not use a mod_rewrite rule?
MVC is a software engineering concept which is used more widely than just in ASP.net.
In a nutshell it encourages strong separation of:
business logic (the Model) the code which does all the brute force work behind the scenes; dealing with the database, performing large calculations; and
user interface logic (the View) the code which presents information to your users in a pretty way.
The C is for Controller - the ligaments that bind the bones of the model and the muscles of the views and allow them to communicate with each other cleanly.
You are correct that 'normal' ASP.net uses code-behind files so that page markup is kept separate from the code that generates that markup (in contrast to languages like PHP where code is embedded directly amongst HTML), but MVC ASP.net encourages even more separation in the ways I described above.
Take a look at this tutorial for a more detailed discussion of the pattern. Also take a look at this SO question
The MVC pattern has nothing to do with rewriting URLs. ASP.net MVC might make this easier but that is not by any means it's main purpose.
Testability is a big benefit of using ASP.NET MVC. It is non-trivial to write unit tests for ASP.NET winforms. It is much easier to unit tests for Controllers.
If you are doing MVC correctly, your views should be very light, and a lot of your logic is implemented in the Controllers.
Let me compare the two for you:
Asp.net web forms
They matured the old ASP technology that was much more like PHP. Code and presentation were piled up in the same file. Asp.net web forms upgraded this model by providing a mechanism of separating the two. But they built on top of the good things that windows application developers had. The drag drop interface creation with control events just like they exist in a windows application. Event thought code was separate from HTML, they were not separated. You still reference a lot of view controls in your codebehind, hence they're still very much bound to eachother.
Therefore it was rather easy to start developing on Asp.net web forms. But non savvy developers soon got to a bottleneck they didn't know existed (like slow postbacks due to huge view state etc.). Technology used some tricks to make this work. But on a serious large scale application this became quite a problem. Developers had to mingle their code to make it work with Asp.net web forms framework. Their complex forms had complex codebehinds with hard maintainable code with complex state.
The good (as well the bad) thing were at that time rich server controls. Nowadays with web 2.0 they don't seem rich anymore since they don't actually support client side functionality as much as they should. So Microsoft decided to also cram in something else. Update panels. That made partial rendering (and Ajax) possible with almost a flick of a finger. But it came with a cost. Everyone that used (uses) it soon realised it's not a viable solution that a professional application could implement.
Asp.net MVC
Now we have a new technology that doesn't have much in common with Asp.net web forms except for its first part of the name. MVC framework actually does separate code from user interface (view). Controller actions (code that executes on any HTTP request) is kept small and doesn't do anything with visualisation (it doesn't bind data to certain controls etc.). Controller action barely prepares data for the view to either consume or not. It's up to the view. Controller code doesn't in any way shape or form reference any view controls or anything. They're actually separate in MVC.
Views on the other hand just display and provide data. They can be partially or fully rendered. They support Ajax functionality to the point that everyone would like to use. Actually everything is separated into basic little things. Divide et impera (divide and conquer) seems to be the save-line here.
There's not hidden functionality. No flirting with windows development. It pure request response framework. Developer has the ability to 100% control the visual aspect of their app. But for the cost of not having rich controls out of the box. Those may be provided by the community or some developers prefer to create per purpose controls that serve the process much better.
Which one is better then?
Both have their pros and cons. But if you decide to build a semi complex, modern and maintainable application I'd suggest you give MVC a go.
But if all you need to do is a 15 screens application (without any particular interface requirements) it would be much faster to create it using Asp.net web forms.
MVC is a design pattern. Its purpose is to separate business logic and presentation details.
ASP.Net MVC is a mechanism to create web applications using ASP.Net and the MVC pattern.
One of the features of ASP.NET MVC is the ability to use SEO friendly URLs to provide commands to the controller part.
You can do as you have stated but ASP.Net have provided you a mechanism to do this easier.
The way ASP.Net Webforms was designed is that it made it easy for you drag controls on to the web form and code the logic underneath. ASP.Net MVC is designed so you separate your concerns easier.
The URL part of the ASP.NET MVC framework is just a modern phenomena to produce search engine friendly urls. They've infact been around long before the Microsoft team decided to add them to the framework (which required IIS7 before it could be done with no IIS extension).
The greatest pros in my view come from being able to test more easily, and separating off the parts of your application more cleanly. The whole ActionResult architecture of the ASP.NET MVC framework makes it very easy to switch from AJAX to plain out POSTs.
Delphi 5 use to employ the MVC model for its ISAPI extensions, 10 years ago.
MVC is not just an ASP.net thing, it is a design pattern that was widely accepted before it was created within the .NET framework, the thing about MVC is the separation of data from presentation(user interaction) from the business layer. It was just a way for Microsoft to offer that type of design pattern under the .NET framework
Although guys before me already give enough answers to the queston of purpose of ASP.NET MVC there is one thing I would like to add.
The ASP.NET Web Forms tried to abstract html and web from web development. That approach lead to the lacks in performances and usage of rich javascript frameworks.It was possible to create web application without actual knowledge of the web.
And to answer to you initial question, the purpose of ASP.NET MVC, I'll quote Dino Esposito:
With ASP.NET MVC, you rediscover the good old taste of the Web—stateless behavior, full control over every single bit of HTML, total script and CSS freedom.
MVC existed long before people tried to use it in HTML pages. The main reason for MVC is to get a grip on the logic to drive your application. MVC allows you to clearly separate things that should be separate: The model, code which converts the model value for the display and the code which controls the model.
So this is not related to HTML or URLs in any way. It's just that MVC makes it really simple to have clean HTML and simple URLs.
Some Background:
ASP.net MVC is primarly a paradigm shift in the way you structure and develop ASP.NET applications. Shifting from a "code behind" type of mentality to more of a standard MVC Ruby on Rails like mentality. I applaud it's efforts as a simlifying tool towards unit testing ease and seperation of code (although the html inline code could be debatable).
Expression and XAML is a way to describe the presentation layer that can be simple for designers.
The question is:
If we are to use ASP.NET MVC in developing our next website how does the design team that uses Expression and XAML supposed to create (V)iews or integrate into the development flow?
More specifically can Expression users still operate in an ASP.NET MVC world?
Note that the pages in Expression's model use a code behind paradigm as well.
It is a hack, but you can use XAML to render static images in ASP.NET MVC. Check out my post XAML Meets ASP.NET MVC - Serverside Image Rendering - that shows how to render XAML and WPF controls as an image in ASP.NET MVC
http://amazedsaint.blogspot.com/2010/07/xaml-meets-aspnet-mvc-create-databound.html
There is also the MvcXaml project that is a View Engine that allows for images to be dynamically generated based on a XAML view.
http://mvcxaml.codeplex.com
I will try to answer this, making several assumptions that may be wrong.
ASP.Net MVC is a web technology and XAML is a desktop one. You can use XAML inside Internet Explorer, but it's basically a hack, it works best for desktop or silverlight applications.
If you want a paradigm similar to MVC for the desktop, you should try the M-V-VM pattern, who is more appropriate to WPF and XAML.
With M-V-VM you can create views almost code-behind free.
A great intro to M-V-VM is this video by Jason Dolinger
If you are making a website using MVC and you are trying to integrate the design team, you should let them create the HTML+CSS views of your site, while the developers create the controllers and the models.
Please comment in this answer if I have misinterpreted the question.
I'm currently banging my head on these terms. However, maybe this silverlight-as-a-view-in-aspnet-mvc article will help? You've asked about XAML, and I thing this is what Silverlight uses...
Given the situation:
A user control implementing IDataSource. It has a textbox or two, and a button. Now, when put on any page and adding a GridView with the DataSource being that control, presto you have a grid with filters .
How should I go about implementing this scenario in asp.net MVC ?
Any suggestions ?
Should I give more details ?
I think you've stumbled across one of the defining differences between ASP.NET MVC and WebForms. You can't do this sort of RAD drag-and-drop type stuff with MVC (right now). You'd need to basically build your own GridView View and stick in some filtering actions (with jQuery or something for clientside filtering). The user control could be made into a "partial view" in this case.
However, if this is the sort of application that you do often, I don't think that switching to MVC will give you many benefits (given the limited context information that you've supplied).
Your question is "How", but I think the more important question is "Why".