In my mvc application, I have a view in which the content for the view will have to be rendered in html format. html string will be obtained form the model in the view. How can i rener the html mark up as such in view?
Thanks in advance
Have a read through: http://www.asp.net/mvc/tutorials/asp-net-mvc-views-overview-cs to see an example of the ASPX view engine rendering HTML.
You shouldn't be building HTML in the model (or in the controller and putting it into the model).
Update: as Jamie Dixon has mentioned, there are situations in which business properties of the model will contain HTML.
Generally, speaking:
The model should contain properties and business logic.
The views will render the HTML that you need.
The controller calls the business logic needed and passes the model to the correct view.
If, in the view, you wish to write out a heading based on a property called Title on the Model, you can use this:
<h1><%: Model.Title %></h1>
or if you are storing a HTML string in a property called StoredHtml:
<div>
<%= Model.StoredHtml%>
</div>
Note that <%= has been used rather than <%:, as <%: will encode HTML for security reasons (like <script> tags being saved).
Related
I am very new in asp.net MVC kindly let me know where is should use partial view and where i should Render Partial view . Thanks in advance
This link might help.
Html.RenderPartial
This method result will be directly written to the HTTP response stream means it used the same TextWriter object as used in the current webpage/template.
This method returns void.
Simple to use and no need to create any action.
RenderPartial method is useful when the displaying data in the partial view is already in the corresponding view model.
For example : In a blog to show comments of an article, we would like to use RenderPartial method since an article information with comments are already populated in the view model.
#{Html.RenderPartial("_Comments");}
This method is faster than Partial method since its result is directly written to the response stream which makes it fast.
Html.Partial
Renders the partial view as an HTML-encoded string.
This method result can be stored in a variable, since it returns string type value.
Simple to use and no need to create any action.
Like RenderPartial method, Partial method is also useful when the displaying data in the partial view is already in the corresponding view model.
For example: In a blog to show comments of an article, you can use Partial method since an article information with comments are already populated in the view model.
#Html.Partial("_Comments")
Both of these helper method are used for rendering partial views
Both have different syntax in razor view #Html.Partial("_student", items) and {Html.RenderPartial("_student", items);}, since render partial return void and the output is written directly to output stream, it has different syntax than Partial.
Syntax in web from view
<%:Html.Partial("_student") %> and <% Html.RenderPartial("_student"); %>
Partial Returns MVCHtmlString, which can be assigned to variables.
Performance wise Render partial is better as it writes directly to output stream.
And of-course you can find a lot of references online and within stack overflow to read
I have contest model which I want to use in my _header partial.
The header partial is located in an elements folder but there is no elements model.
I want my header to display all the contests in the menu.
How can I best handle this? Create a elements model or move the _header partial to my Contest folder and add it there to the controller?
Simply spoken a model is mostly holding some data which is persited in the database. To insert content in the header while rendering specific views you can stick with content_for. Basic idea: while rendering a view you can pass your object / model via locals from the controller into your view template which passes it further via content_for to render the header specifically.
I have a concept of a modal window in my MVC application that renders some HTML that wraps content that will eventually show inside on the modal. The content will be HTML either directly hard coded in the view or generated by an Html helper as passed in as a parameter.
I'd like to wrap the modal content in a Razor template or partial in my application to avoid spreading it all over my application as it used in a number of pages. What's the easiest way of doing this? Can I achieve something similar in i partial view with out a model?
Build a viewmodel for the partial view... a simple C# class with a string property for the Html... using the [AllowHtml] attribute on it will let you stuff HTML in the object.
In your parent view, stuff your HTML into this view model and pass it to the partial when you call it.
So, the title should speak for itself.
To create re-usable components in ASP.NET MVC, we have 3 options (could be others i haven't mentioned):
Partial View:
#Html.Partial(Model.Foo, "SomePartial")
Custom Editor Template:
#Html.EditorFor(model => model.Foo)
Custom Display Template:
#Html.DisplayFor(model => model.Foo)
In terms of the actual View/HTML, all three implementations are identical:
#model WebApplications.Models.FooObject
<!-- Bunch of HTML -->
So, my question is - when/how do you decide which one of the three to use?
What i'm really looking for is a list of questions to ask yourself before creating one, for which the answers can be used to decide on which template to use.
Here's the 2 things i have found better with EditorFor/DisplayFor:
They respect model hierarchies when rendering HTML helpers (e.g if you have a "Bar" object on your "Foo" model, the HTML elements for "Bar" will be rendered with "Foo.Bar.ElementName", whilst a partial will have "ElementName").
More robust, e.g if you had a List<T> of something in your ViewModel, you could use #Html.DisplayFor(model => model.CollectionOfFoo), and MVC is smart enough to see it's a collection and render out the single display for each item (as opposed to a Partial, which would require an explicit for loop).
I've also heard DisplayFor renders a "read-only" template, but i don't understand that - couldn't i throw a form on there?
Can someone tell me some other reasons? Is there a list/article somewhere comparing the three?
EditorFor vs DisplayFor is simple. The semantics of the methods is to generate edit/insert and display/read only views (respectively). Use DisplayFor when displaying data (i.e. when you generate divs and spans that contain the model values). Use EditorFor when editing/inserting data (i.e. when you generate input tags inside a form).
The above methods are model-centric. This means that they will take the model metadata into account (for example you could annotate your model class with [UIHintAttribute] or [DisplayAttribute] and this would influence which template gets chosen to generate the UI for the model. They are also usually used for data models (i.e. models that represent rows in a database, etc)
On the other hand Partial is view-centric in that you are mostly concerned with choosing the correct partial view. The view doesn't necessarily need a model to function correctly. It can just have a common set of markup that gets reused throughout the site. Of course often times you want to affect the behavior of this partial in which case you might want to pass in an appropriate view model.
You did not ask about #Html.Action which also deserves a mention here. You could think of it as a more powerful version of Partial in that it executes a controller child action and then renders a view (which is usually a partial view). This is important because the child action can execute additional business logic that does not belong in a partial view. For example it could represent a shopping cart component. The reason to use it is to avoid performing the shopping cart-related work in every controller in your application.
Ultimately the choice depends on what is it that you are modelling in your application. Also remember that you can mix and match. For example you could have a partial view that calls the EditorFor helper. It really depends on what your application is and how to factor it to encourage maximum code reuse while avoiding repetition.
You certainly could customize DisplayFor to display an editable form. But the convention is for DisplayFor to be readonly and EditorFor to be for editing. Sticking with the convention will ensure that no matter what you pass into DisplayFor, it will do the same type of thing.
Just to give my 2c worth, our project is using a partial view with several jQuery tabs, and each tab rendering its fields with its own partial view. This worked fine until we added a feature whereby some of the tabs shared some common fields. Our first approach to this was to create another partial view with these common fields, but this got very clunky when using EditorFor and DropDownListFor to render fields and drop downs. In order to get the ids and names unique we had to render the fields with a prefix depending on the parent partial view that was rendering it:
<div id="div-#(idPrefix)2" class="toHide-#(idPrefix)" style="display:none">
<fieldset>
<label for="#(idPrefix).Frequency">Frequency<span style="color: #660000;"> *</span></label>
<input name="#(idPrefix).Frequency"
id="#(idPrefix)_Frequency"
style="width: 50%;"
type="text"
value="#(defaultTimePoint.Frequency)"
data-bind="value: viewState.#(viewStatePrefix).RecurringTimepoints.Frequency"
data-val="true"
data-val-required="The Frequency field is required."
data-val-number="The field Frequency must be a number."
data-val-range-min="1"
data-val-range-max="24"
data-val-range="The field Frequency must be between 1 and 24."
data-val-ignore="true"/>
#Html.ValidationMessage(idPrefix + ".Frequency")
... etc
</fieldset>
</div>
This got pretty ugly so we decided to use Editor Templates instead, which worked out much cleaner. We added a new View Model with the common fields, added a matching Editor Template, and rendered the fields using the Editor Template from different parent views. The Editor Template correctly renders the ids and names.
So in short, a compelling reason for us to use Editor Templates was the need to render some common fields in multiple tabs. Partial views aren't designed for this but Editor Templates handle the scenario perfectly.
Use _partial view approach if:
View Centric Logic
What to keep all _partial view related HTML in this view only. In the template method, you will have to keep some HTML outside the Template View like "Main Header or any outer border/settings.
Want to render partial view with logic (From controller) using URL.Action("action","controller").
Reasons to use Template:
Want to remove ForEach(Iterator). Template is well enough to identify Model as a list type. It will do it automatically.
Model Centric Logic. If multiple views are found in the same displayfor Template folder, then rendering will depend on Passed Model.
Another difference that hasn't been mentioned so far is that a partialview doesn't add model prefixes while a template does
Here is the issue
I have a lot of content-heavy views in my ASP.NET MVC 2 site. These contain several re-occurring HTML patterns. When using ASP.NET Webforms, a class derived from WebControl could encapsulate these patterns. I'd like some pointers on the correct approach for this problem with MVC.
Detailed Explanation
Patterns not unlike the following HTML markup keep occurring throughout these views. The markup renders into an isolated a box of content:
<div class="top container">
<div class="header">
<p>The title</p>
<em>(and a small note)</em>
</div>
<div class="simpleBox rounded">
<p>This is content.</p>
<p><strong>Some more content</strong></p>
</div>
</div>
This is a trivial example, but there are more complex recurring patterns. In ASP.NET Webforms I would have abstracted such code into a WebControl (let's say I'd have named it BoxControl), being included on a page like this:
<foo:BoxControl runat="server">
<Header>The title</Header>
<Note>(and a small note)</Note>
<Content>
<p>This is content.</p>
<p><strong>Some more content</strong></p>
</Content>
</foo:BoxControl>
This abstraction makes it easy to adapt the way the box is constructed throughout the site, by just altering the BoxControl source. It also keeps the static HTML content neatly together in the View Page, even when combining several BoxControls on a page. Another benefit is that the HTML used as content is recognized by the IDE, thus providing syntax highlighting/checking.
To my understanding, WebControls are discouraged in ASP.NET MVC. Instead of a WebControl, I could accomplish the abstraction with a partial view. Such a view would then be included in a View Page as follows:
<%= Html.Partial("BoxControl", new {
Header="The Title",
Note="(and a small note)",
Content="<p>This is content.</p><p><strong>Some more content</strong></p>"});
%>
This is not ideal, since the 'Content' parameter could become very long, and the IDE does not treat it as HTML when passed this way.
Considered Solutions
Strongly-Typed ViewModels can be passed to the Html.Partial call instead of the lengthy parameters shown above. But then I'd have to pull the content in from somewhere else (a CMS, or Resource file). I'd like for the content to be contained in the View Page.
I have also considered the solution proposed by Jeffrey Palermo, but that would mean lots of extra files scattered around the project. I'd like the textual content of any view to be restricted to one file only.
Should I not want to abstract the markup away? Or is there maybe an approach, suitable for MVC, that I am overlooking here? What is the drawback to 'sinning' by using a WebControl?
There is a solution to this problem, although the way to get there is a little more clutsy than other frameworks like Ruby on Rails.
I've used this method to create markup for Twitter Bootstrap's control group syntax which looks like this:
<div class="control-group">
<label class="control-label">[Label text here]</label>
<div class="controls">
[Arbitrary markup here]
</div>
</div>
Here's how:
1) Create a model for the common markup snippet. The model should write markup on construction and again on dispose:
using System;
using System.Web.Mvc;
namespace My.Name.Space
{
public class ControlGroup : IDisposable
{
private readonly ViewContext m_viewContext;
private readonly TagBuilder m_controlGroup;
private readonly TagBuilder m_controlsDiv;
public ControlGroup(ViewContext viewContext, string labelText)
{
m_viewContext = viewContext;
/*
* <div class="control-group">
* <label class="control-label">Label</label>
* <div class="controls">
* input(s)
* </div>
* </div>
*/
m_controlGroup = new TagBuilder("div");
m_controlGroup.AddCssClass("control-group");
m_viewContext.Writer.Write(m_controlGroup.ToString(TagRenderMode.StartTag));
if (labelText != null)
{
var label = new TagBuilder("label");
label.AddCssClass("control-label");
label.InnerHtml = labelText;
m_viewContext.Writer.Write(label.ToString());
}
m_controlsDiv = new TagBuilder("div");
m_controlsDiv.AddCssClass("controls");
m_viewContext.Writer.Write(m_controlsDiv.ToString(TagRenderMode.StartTag));
}
public void Dispose()
{
m_viewContext.Writer.Write(m_controlsDiv.ToString(TagRenderMode.EndTag));
m_viewContext.Writer.Write(m_controlGroup.ToString(TagRenderMode.EndTag));
}
}
}
2) Create a nifty Html helper
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Web.Mvc;
using My.Name.Space
namespace Some.Name.Space
{
public static class FormsHelper
{
public static ControlGroup ControlGroup(this HtmlHelper helper, string labelText)
{
return new ControlGroup(helper.ViewContext, labelText);
}
}
}
3) Use it in the view (Razor code)
#using (Html.ControlGroup("My label"))
{
<input type="text" />
<p>Arbitrary markup</p>
<input type="text" name="moreInputFields" />
}
This is also the way MVC framework renders a form with the Html.BeginForm method
Well you wouldn't render the partial like that, pass it a strongly-typed ViewModel, like this:
<%= Html.RenderPartial("BoxControl", contentModel) %>
contentModel is the ViewModel (just a POCO-like storage mechanism for your views), which the strongly typed partial view would bind to.
So you can do this in your partial view:
<h1><%: Model.Header %></h1>
<p><%: Model.Content %></p>
etc etc
After considering the answers and running an experiment, I'm inclined to adhere to the pure MVC approach and duplicate some presentation code throughout View Pages. I'd like to elaborate on the rationale for that decision.
Partial View
When using a Partial View, The content for the box needs to be passed as a View Model, making the View Page less readable versus declaring the content HTML on the spot. Remember that the content does not come from a CMS, so that would mean filling the View Model with HTML in a controller or setting a local variable in the View Page. Both of these methods fail to take advantage of IDE features for dealing with HTML.
WebControl
On the other hand, a WebControl-derived class is discouraged and also turns out to have some practical issues. The main issue that the declarative, hierarchical style of traditional ASP.NET .aspx pages just does not fit the procedural style of MVC.NET View Pages. You have to choose for either a full blown traditional approach, or go completely MVC.
To illustrate this, the most prominent issue in my experimental implementation was one of variable scope: when iterating a list of products, the MVC-way is to use a foreach loop, but that introduces a local variable which will not be available in the scope of the WebControl. The traditional ASP.NET approach would be to use a Repeater instead of the foreach. It seems to be a slippery slope to use any traditional ASP.NET controls at all, because I suspect you'll soon find yourself needing to combine more and more of them to get the job done.
Plain HTML
Forgoing the abstraction at all, you are left with duplicate presentation code. This is against DRY, but produces very readable code.
It doesnt look like webforms has that much less html to me, it seems more like a lateral move. Using a partial in MVC can make it cleaner but the html markup you needed will still be there, in one place or another. If its mostly the extra html that bothers you, you might take a look at the NHaml view engine or check out haml
the haml website.
I'm by no means a Haml expert but the html does look a lot cleaner...
.top container
.header
%p
The title
%em
(and a small note)
.simpleBox rounded
%p
This is content.
%p
Some more content