In Eric Hexter's Input Builders, different templates use different strongly-typed models; for example String uses PropertyViewModel<object>, DateTime uses PropertyViewModel<DateTime>, Form uses PropertyViewModel[], and so forth. Spark View Engine doesn't seem to allow this, because all elements that compose the presentation (masters, views, partials, etc.) are compiled into a single class.
If I try to setup a view involving more than one template, I get the following exception:
Only one viewdata model can be declared. PropertyViewModel<DateTime> != PropertyViewModel<object>
If leave just one viewdata declaration, I get another exception about the passed model item mismatching the required one.
It seems like I will have to give up either the Input Builders or Spark, which is sad because I really love both. So I thought I'd ask here to see if anybody has already figured this out.
Thanks.
You can always use <% Html.RenderPartial() %> for partial view rendering with different model. This will create more than one view class.
Related
I would like to use the generic razor helper function Html.Partial to render views that have common html in them.
For instance, I have two views set up in Sitecore Payment Information.cshtml and Agent Payment Information.cshtml. These are rendered using the Sitecore rendering engine. Both of these views have very similar html in them that I would like to put in razor views not set in Sitecore and call them with #Html.Partial as appose to #Html.Sitecore().Rendering() as the latter forces me to set up a view and model in Sitecore which I am not sure is necessary.
My question is, is there anything that Sitecore does behind the scenes that makes it necessary to usethe #Html.Sitecore().Rendering() helper method instead of the #Html.Partial() helper method? Everything seems to work fine and I believe the entire view should get cached since the #Html.Partial call is nested inside either the Payment Information view or the Agent Payment information view set up in Sitecore.
Thanks in advance.
I have Html.Partial working in an MVC solution using Glass for ORM. There are two ways I've used this, one where the assumed model being passed to the partial is the same as the parent rendering and another where we create the model on the fly.
Assumes parent rendering model is passed:
#Html.Partial("~/Views/Components/MyPartialView.cshtml")
Instantiates a new model that is passed in:
#Html.Partial("~/Views/Components/Navigation/SecondaryNavigationRendering.cshtml", new SecondaryNavigation())
The parent view will need to have a mapped model in Sitecore. The secondary view does not have a mapped model in Sitecore but is typed to receive the model being passed (so in my first example that would be my IBasePage model, in my second it would be my SecondaryNavigation model).
Hope this helps.
I'm porting an existing system to ASP.NET MVC2. In the current legacy app, the user can select from dozens of available fields to customize CRUD forms for different entities in the domain model, similar to the way ERP systems allow customization of core modules.
My question: I'm looking for a good pattern or example for this kind of behavior in ASP.NET MVC2. It seems to me it's rather like creating a ViewModel dynamically based upon user choices, or perhaps the right approach is data-driven view pages that aren't strongly-typed where I can reflect over the results client-side to determine field headings or something -- if that makes sense :). Or maybe I can drive AutoMapper or similar dynamically # runtime based on user choices?
The underlying domain model is EF4-based and I'm using a simple Repository pattern # present for the ViewModel.
TIA for any input! Michael
If I didn't find anything else that matched the needs and went on to do it custom, I would:
Use the ViewModel with all the fields / not just the ones the user picked.
Pass both the ViewModel and the view configuration to the view
Call some html helper that for each item in the configuration adds a field with the corresponding property in the model
The configuration could be passed as either part of a containing ViewModel or in a separate entry in ViewData
Depending on what you need, building/passing the view configuration could be put in an Action Filter. Alternatively the helper could pull it directly.
A different approach is if you need completely custom fields. I mean user defined fields. If that's the scenario, that's not typed at the controller level already, so I'd pass the list of fields/values to the view. The view can do a foreach on those adding the fields. Again that could be moved to a HtmlHelper.
Sorry if this is a basic question - I'm having some trouble making the mental transition to ASP.NET MVC from the page framework.
In the page framework, I often use ASCX files to create small, encapsulated chunks of functionality which get inclded in various places throughout a site. If I'm building a page and I need one of these controls - I just add a reference and everything just works.
As far as I can tell, in MVC, the ASCX file is just a partial view. Does this mean that wherever I want to add one of these units of functionality I also have to add some code to the controller's action method to make sure the relevant ViewData is available to the ASCX?
If this is the case, it seems like a bit of a step backwards to me. It means, for example, that I couldn't just 'drop' a control into a master page without having to add code to every controller whose views use that master page!
I suspect I'm missing something - any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
- Chris
As far as I can tell, in MVC, the ASCX
file is just a partial view. Does this
mean that wherever I want to add one
of these units of functionality I also
have to add some code to the
controller's action method to make
sure the relevant ViewData is
available to the ASCX?
Yes.
However, you can use a RenderAction method in your view instead of RenderPartial, and all of your functionality (including the data being passed to the sub-view) will be encapsulated.
In other words, this will create a little package that incorporates a controller method, view data, and a partial view, which can be called with one line of code from within your main view.
Your question has been answered already, but just for sake of completeness, there's another option you might find attractive sometimes.
Have you seen how "controls" are masked on ASP.NET MVC? They are methods of the "HtmlHelper". If you want a textbox bound to "FirstName", for example, you can do:
<%= Html.Textbox("FirstName") %>
And you have things like that for many standard controls.
What you can do is create your own methods like that. To create your own method, you have to create an extension method on the HtmlHelper class, like this:
public static class HtmlHelperExtensions
{
public static string Bold(this HtmlHelper html, string text)
{
return "<b>" + text + "</b>\n";
}
}
Then in your view, after opening the namespace containing this class definition, you can use it like this:
<%= Html.Bold("This text will be in bold-face!") %>
Well, this is not particularly useful. But you can do very interesting things. One I use quite often is a method that takes an enumeration and created a Drop Down List with the values from this enumeration (ex: enum Gender { Male, Female }, and in the view something like Gender: <%= Html.EnumDropDown(Model.Gender) %>).
Good luck!
You can render a partial view and pass a model object to.
<% Html.RenderPartial("MyPartial", ViewData["SomeObject"]);
In your partial view (.ascx) file, you can then use the "Model" object (assuming you've inherited the proper object in your # Control deceleration) to do whatever you need to with that object.
You can, ofcourse, not pass and Model and just take the partial view's text and place it where you want it.
In your main view (.aspx file), you will need to define the proper object in the ViewData that you're passing to the partial view.
Another method you can do is use:
<% Html.RenderAction("MyAction", "MyController", new { Parameter1="Value1"}) %>
What the previous method does is call a controller Action, take its response, and place it where you called the "RenderAction()" method. Its the equivalent of running a request against a controller action and reading the response, except you place the response in another file.
Google "renderaction and renderpartial" for some more information.
I have a standard menu using ul and li tags. And in my database, I have a table Users with a field 'certificate' and depending the value of this 'certificate', the user will see or not some items of the menu.
I was reading some texts and I think I will have to use ActionFilters. Is this right?
So, how can I render different menus depending which user is accessing?
thanks!!
Check out the Html.RenderAction methods that the futures assembly introduces. They can let you, in a very clean fashion, render an action method. This means that you can have a MenuController (for example) that takes care of all of the logic about what menu items you can render. Then it can just pass a simple data structure to the view, whose responsibility it is to render that data structure. Very clean.
I would consider using RenderPartial or RenderAction instead. ActionFilters are not quite suited to that kind of thing. Take a look at this article.
My MVC application contains a parent model, which will contain 1 or more child models.
I have set up the main view to display properties from the parent model, and then loop through a collection of my child models (of various types, but all inheriting from the same base type). Each of the child models have a corresponding partial view.
My "parent" view iterates over the child models like this:
foreach (ChildBase child in ViewData.Model.Children)
{
Html.RenderPartial("Partials/"+child.ChildType.ToString()+"Child",
section);
}
My application has the appropriate /Partials/ChildType1.ascx, ChildType2.ascx, etc. Everything works great.
Is this an appropriate way to use Partial Views? It feels slightly off-kilter due to the dynamic names, but I don't know another way to perform dynamic selection of the proper view without resorting to a big switch statement.
Is it advisable to use the same view for multiple "modes" of the same model? I would like to use the same .ascx for displaying the "read only" view of the model, as well as an edit form, based on which Controller Action is used to return the view.
Iconic,
It's difficult to answer the questions without knowing exactly what you're trying to achieve.
I'll have a go though:
If you're familiar with web forms, think of your partial view as a webforms usercontrol for the moment and think of the part of your model that is relevant to your partial views as a 'fragment of information' that want to pass across to the partial view.
Natural choices for using a partial view would be for elements used in many views across your site.
So ... in answer:
1.Although what you are doing is valid, it doesn't seem quite correct. An example of a partial view I have used might be a row in a grid of data where you'd call the partial view passing in the row object as its model:
foreach (MyObject o in Model.objects)
{
Html.RenderPartial("Shared/gridRowForObject.ascx", o, ViewData);
}
You can strongly type your views also to expect a specific type to be passed through as the Model object.
Again another use might be a login box or a 'contact me form' etc.
2._Ultimately this is a personal design decision but I'd go for the option that requires the least application/presentation logic and the cleanest code in your view. I'd tend to avoid writing to many conditional calls in your view for example and by inferring a base type to pass across to all of your partial views as in your example, may well tie you down.
When learning the MVC framework I found the Oxite code to be useful.
I hope that helps.