ASP.NET MVC Route Key Words - asp.net-mvc

What are all the available routing key words?
I've seen examples using resource, pathInfo, url, controller, action, etc, but I have no clue what is available for me to use.
I know if you just put an arbitrary word like "{blah}" in there, you are defining a parameter that will be used, but I'm guessing you won't be able to use "{resource}" as a parameter name.

{controller} and {action} are the only two that are reserved in MVC v1. MVC v2 may additionally reserve {area}, but the details on that are still being fleshed out. When I say "reserved", I mean that MVC gives special meaning to them, but from a Routing perspective they're all keywords just the same and are not terribly special.
If you want, you can take controller, action, or any other reserved keyword in as a parameter to your action method. They're treated just like any other parameter.

Related

How to set {city} in all the routes MVC 5

I am developing a marketplace application which is supposed to have different products and vendors which are mapped to different cities.
The idea is that I need to store the CurrentCity in context so that I can use it to construct urls, filter data, fetch delivery areas etc.
e.g.
www.mywebsite.com/cityA/listings
www.mywebsite.com/cityB/listings
www.mywebsite.com/cityA/cart
www.mywebsite.com/cityB/cart
Something like the MoonPig website (https://www.moonpig.com/uk/Gift/Flowers/)
Currently, I am passing the city as a parameter in almost all the controller methods and also storing it in a cookie.
Alternatively, I am also thinking of creating a BaseController and possibly inject it in the OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext context).
But the problem with the first approach is that all the Action methods need to have "city" as a parameter and I need to have it in context for doing something like
#Url.Action("Index", "Listings", new {city = cityName})
If I use the second approach, then I don't think I'll get the urls which have city in them.
I am ideally looking for a solution with which I can inject a city parameter as Base route / segment in the MVC RouteDictionary so that all the Urls are generated accordingly (with #url helper).
Is this possible or is there a better way to tackle this problem?
Would really appreciate if someone can show me a direction.
But the problem with the first approach is that all the Action methods need to have "city" as a parameter
This assumption is incorrect, since MVC automatically passes values from the current context when generating URLs, so there is no need to explicitly pass city as long as it is configured in the route and present in the URL. See this answer for how you can utilize this behavior for localization, which is similar to what you are doing.

ASP.NET MVC - CMS Questions

I'm looking at developing an application that will include a CMS. I'm a seasoned web forms developer but only really just moving into MVC.
I have a couple of questions that I hope some of you guys can answer:
First, my current web forms CMS allows users to create a page, and then "drop" any number of user controls onto that page they have created. The way I do this is to create an entry in the DB together with the path and then use the LoadControl method.
I can see I can do this with partial views, but partial views have no code behind. If I've potentially got 100 controls that people can drop onto a page, does this mean that the ViewBag in the controller needs to cater for all 100 controls just in case they are used on the view? For example, a web forms user control will contain logic: rptItems.DataSource = blah; rptItems.DataBind()
With MVC, I'm assuming that logic will be in the view controller and the view would access it by the ViewBag? I'm a little confused at how to do this.
Secondly, how would you handle deep routing?
EG:
Store/Products/Category is fine, but what about Store/Products/Category/Delivery/UK ? Would I need to set up a route in global.asax for each route I need? In web forms, I just called the ReWritePath method and handled the routing myself using regular expressions.
Thanks for the time to read this, and hopefully answer some of my queries
For your second question, (ie, "deep routing"), you can handle this within your controller instead of adding real routes. Each part of the url is available via the RouteData.Values collection inside of your controller action. So, your route may look like
~/Store/Products/Category/{*params}
Assuming typical route configuration, this would call the Category(...) action method on ~/areas/store/controllers/storeController, which could then grap delivery and uk from the RouteData.Values collection.
There are a lot of other approaches to this - storing routes in a database and using associated metadata to find the correct controller and method - but I think this is the simplest. Also, it may be obvious, but if you really only need two parameters beyond 'Category' in your example, you could just use
public ActionResult Category(string category, string region)
{
...
}
and a route:
~/store/{controller}/{action}/{category}/{region}/{*params}
Delivery and UK would be mapped to the the category and region parameters, respectively. Anything beyond uk would still be available via the RouteData.Values collection. This assumes that you don't have more specific routes, like
~/store/{controller}/{action}/{category}/{region}/{foo}/{bar}/{long_url}/{etc}
that would be a better match. ({*params} might conflict with the second route; you'll have to investigate to see if it's a problem.)
For your first question:
You can dynamically generate the view source and return it as a string from the controller, eliminating the need to pass a lot of stuff via ViewBag. If a virtual page from your CMS database requires inclusion of partial views, you would add the references to those components when generating the page. (This may or may not address your problem - if not, please provide more information.)

asp.net mvc dynamic/relative routing

I'm developing a website which has a modular structure.
Every segment of the url presents an content item.
For example url: www.mysite.com/blogs/programming/2010/01/
Root item is 'blogs' of type 'area'. It has a child item 'programming' of type 'blog'.
Now there's '2010/01' left of the url.
Last valid (routable) item 'programming' was a blog so I need to map '2010/01' to action
BlogController.Date(int blogid, int year, int? month, int? day)
Every controller comes from a module (separate dll), which registers some item types (blog registers types 'blog' (routable) and 'post' (not routable). 'blog' can have children of type 'post').
When last valid (routable) item of the url is detected, logic knows which assembly and controller to look for. Now I need a way to invoke correct action with correct parameters.
Some routes for item of type 'blog'
{year}/
{year}/{month}
{year}/{month}/{day}
feed/
category/{category-name}/
tag/{tag-name}/
search/{*phrase}
{*post-name}
Any suggestions what would be a simple way to do the routing?
To solve the action parameter signature problem, I personally would create a new Model class "BlogModel" and have only that as your single parameter. This way, you'd have a consistent action parameter signature. However, this would require a bit more work, as you would need to create a custom ModelBinder object "BlogModelBinder" and register it to the ModelBinderFactory (or in MVC3 the DependencyResolver). In the "BlogModelBinder" you simply look up the RouteData's parameters and values and bind it to the corresponding field in your "BlogModel."
From my personal experience, I don't think there's an easy way to register your routes: you still would have to individually register the route urls to a specific action. Unless someone has an efficient way of registering the route urls, you can take solace in knowing that we all have to get our hands dirty with the plumbing code.

How Can I Stop ASP.Net MVC Html.ActionLink From Using Existing Route Values?

The website I'm working on has some fairly complicated routing structures and we're experiencing some difficulties working with the routing engine to build URLs the way we need them to be built.
We have a search results page that uses RegEx based pattern matching to group several variables into a single route segment (i.e. "www.host.com/{structuralParameters}" can be the following: "www.host.com/variableA-variableB-variableC" - where variables A through C are all optional). This is working for us fine after a bit of work.
The problem we are experiencing resolves around an annoying feature of the ActionLink method: if you point to the same controller/action it will retain the existing route values whether you want them or not. We prefer to have control over what our links look like and, in some cases, cannot have the existing parameters retained. An example would be where our site's main navigation leads to a search results page with no parameters set - a default search page, if you like. I say this is an annoying feature because it is a rare instance of the ASP.Net MVC Framework seemingly dictating implementation without an obvious extension point - we would prefer not to create custom ActionLink code to write a simple navigation link in our master page!
I've seen some say that you need to explicitly set such parameters to be empty strings but when we try this it just changes the parameters from route values into query string parameters. It doesn't seem right to me that we should be required to explicitly exclude values we aren't explicitly passing as parameters to the ActionLink method but if this is our only option we will use it. However at present if it is displaying in the query string then it is as useless to us as putting the parameters directly into the route.
I'm aware that our routing structure exasperates this problem - we probably wouldn't have any issue if we used a simpler approach (i.e. www.host.com/variableA/variableB/variableC) but our URL structure is not negotiable - it was designed to meet very specific needs relating to usability, SEO, and link/content sharing.
How can we use Html.ActionLink to generate links to pages without falling back on the current route data (or, if possible, needing to explicitly excluding route segments) even if those links lead to the same action methods?
If we do need to explicitly exclude route segments, how can we prevent the method from rendering the routes as query string parameters?
This seemingly small problem is causing us a surprising amount of grief and I will be thankful for any help in resolving it.
EDIT: As requested by LukLed, here's a sample ActionLink call:
// I've made it generic, but this should call the Search action of the
// ItemController, the text and title attribute should say "Link Text" but there
// should be no parameters - or maybe just the defaults, depending on the route.
//
// Assume that this can be called from *any* page but should not be influenced by
// the current route - some routes will be called from other sections with the same
// structure/parameters.
Html.ActionLink(
"Link Text",
"Search",
"Item",
new { },
new { title = "Link Text" }
);
Setting route values to be null or empty string when calling Html.ActionLink or Html.RouteLink (or any URL generation method) will clear out the "ambient" route values.
For example, with the standard MVC controller/action/id route suppose you're on "Home/Index/123". If you call Html.RouteLink(new { id = 456 }) then MVC will notice the "ambient" route values of controller="Home" and action="Index". It will also notice the ambient route value of id="123" but that will get overwritten by the explicit "456". This will cause the generated URL to be "Home/Index/456".
The ordering of the parameters matters as well. For example, say you called Html.RouteLink(new { action = "About" }). The "About" action would overwrite the current "Index" action, and the "id" parameter would get cleared out entirely! But why, you ask? Because once you invalidate a parameter segment then all parameter segments after it will get invalidated. In this case, "action" was invalidated by a new explicit value so the "id", which comes after it, and has no explicit value, also gets invalidated. Thus, the generated URL would be just "Home/About" (without an ID).
In this same scenario if you called Html.RouteLink(new { action = "" }) then the generated URL would be just "Home" because you invalidated the "action" with an empty string, and then that caused the "id" to be invalidated as well because it came after the invalidated "action".
Solution at the root of the problem
It seems that the optimal solution (that doesn't smell like a workaround) is the one that solves the problem where it has roots and that's in routing.
I've written a custom Route class called RouteWithExclusions that is able to define route value names that should be excluded/removed when generating URLs. The problem is when routing falls through routes table and subsequent routes don't have the same route value names...
The whole problem is detailed and explained in my blog post and all the code is provided there as well. Check it out, it may help you solve this routing problem. I've also written two additional MapRoute extension methods that take an additional parameter.
If you want total control of the link, just build the link yourself:
Click Here
Substitute whatever you need inside the href attribute.

ASP.NET MVC One Way Route

Is it possible to define a route in the RouteCollection of Asp.net MVC, so that it just does the "URL rewriting" part and ignore the URL generation with Html.Actionlink(...)?
In fact I want to add a keyword between controller and action (controller/..keyword.../action) for certain very special requests. The generated URLs on the pages, however, should remain using the default routes. (controller/action)
Yes you can do what you are asking. You would just create your own route that inherited from the current one and override GetVirtualPath to always return null. This way no Action lookup would be done, but the URL would still function as a routing mapping to your action/controller.
Also by the way, what is happening isn't URL Rewriting, because you using the Routes to define endpoints in to your application. Or in other words an API. So no rewriting is taking place. Think of the relationship between routes and your action/controller as more of a publically defined namespace for the web. Just like a namespace you are defining a specific spot in your application where your action/controller can be found.

Resources