i want to pass a parameter in url blank but localhost server tell that it is bad url. are i can make them work in MVC 3
the url is
http://localhost:6251/time/saturdau/first/second//nextparameter
you can see that third parameter is blank here. are this request can work whenever 4th parameter pass without passing 3rd paramter.
what i do to make this work.
rather put a work around on this say you make a convention if the parameter passed is null you may try passing something like my_conventional_null_indicator
so instead of making it look like this
http://localhost:6251/time/saturdau/value1/34//70
do this
http://localhost:6251/time/saturdau/value1/34/my_conventional_null_indicator/70
but the best way would still be the conventional way
http://localhost:6251/time/saturdau?param1=value1¶m2=34¶m3=¶m4=70
or the much better way is to maximize the capability of the RouteValueDictionary.
This is not allowed. You can have optional parameters, but they must be the last segment in the URL. You can't have an optional parameter in the middle.
Related
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 am new to Grails/Groovy. Please bear with me if this is a silly question.
I am trying to map an URL having querystring parameters in urlmapping.groovy, something like,
"/rest/employees?empno=123&dept=delivery"(controller:"employees", action="emp")
The values 123 and delivery are dynamic values. In other words, this could be anything that the user can use.
Apparently this syntax is not correct. What is the right way to achieve this?
Just leave /rest/employees"(controller:"employees", action="emp") and you'll get your query parameters as params.empno and params.dept in your action
#splix answer is correct. If you want to use a restfull url, you could do something like
"/rest/employees/$empno/$dept"
instead. Otherwise just leave out the part after "?" as said. In your controller you will still get params.empno and params.dept
Read more here
I got an exception in a web app I'm developing recently from a url something like:
http://domain.com/script.js?bcsi-ac-16E7C1CCF9EF6357=1C76413C00000002kmNHGZK2deV0Qz25TXynq3fMaPTrBAAAAgAAAD5tGgCEAwAACAAAAPUiAgA=
First of all - what in the world is that? From searching it sounds like maybe it's a cookie / session variable of some kind...
Second of all, the exception was about dynamic assignment of a constant. I tried a simpler url:
http://domain.com/script.js?bcsi-ac
And that gave an exception about the variable or method 'bcsi' not being defined, as if it were trying to evaluate it... WHAT!? I sure as hell hope people can't cause my Rails app to evaluate random code just by passing it to the querystring...
To provide more detail: I'm not doing anything unusual with the querystring data in the route or the controller. I just take the params and pass them into a partial as locals (admittedly not the cleanest way to do it, but simple - and that certainly shouldn't cause it to evaluate a parameter name as code?)
OKAY! Answering my own question again. It turns out passing params in as locals to a partial DOES cause it to evaluate the parameter name as code - obviously it can't use the variable name "bcsi-ac" so it tries to evaluate it.
But the question as to whether that poses a security risk still remains... I don't seem to be able to call methods on things, or actually assign things... but maybe I just haven't tried hard enough. It would seem to me that rails should just throw an exception when passing in a locals hash that includes an invalid variable name.
as a general rule of thumb, any time you allow strings from your url to be evaluated as code you are setting up a huge security risk in your application. you might not be able to call methods on locals as your methods exist server side and the code you are evaluating is client side, but this certainly opens your site up to XSS vulnerabilities among others...
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 am facing a problem that one of my fields need to be shown in the url contains special character (/, \, :).
The stupid way to handle this generate action links by using UrlEncode(). Then UrlDecode is used before consuming in controller. But I think it really stupid because too many places need to be adapted.
So, my problem is there any way to extend the url route or just write my own one to achieve it?
Thanks,
Mike
You can extend the System.Web.Routing.Route object to create a custom route and override the GetRouteData and GetVirtualPath methods. These are called to resolve a route's values and create a URL from given route values, respectively. However, I don't think URLs can contain URL encoded values for / (%2f) within the path portion of a URL though it is ok in a query string.