i was looking at this website and i am interested on how did the developer managed to load different htmls in a single page without the current page being reloaded...
here is the website: http://demos.kendoui.com/web/validator/index.html...
for example if you clicked globalization in the Framework section, you can see the url changed, the body changed also but a part of the page remains (the top part) and the current page is not reloaded...
i am just starting in web development and i want to know this technique... i hope you can share it to me.... thanks :)
It is using ajax partial updates. You send request to the server and get portion of the page and then place it in some element, for example in div.
Normal:
<html>
<head>
<head>
<body>
<div id="divToUpdate"></div>
#Ajax.ActionLink("Call Partial", "MyAction", "MyController", AjaxOptions{ UpdateTargetId = "divToUpdate" })
<body>
</html>
Partial:
<span> here is my partial view which will be placed in "divToUpdate" div after clicking "Call Partial" Link </span>
Related
Hello I have some problems with templating pages.
I am returning from controller a view called list:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:layout="http://www.ultraq.net.nz/thymeleaf/layout" layout:decorator="layout/template">
<div layout:fragment="pageContent">
<p>LIST</p>
</div>
</html>
And I would like to put this into template where I have a lot of html stuff and:
<div layout:fragment="pageContent">Demo static page content</div>
But I am getting in web browser only list view.
How to put one view returned from controller to template using SpringStandardDialect?
So if i understand correctly, you want to inject that fragment which is called pageContent into some other html page (lets call it main.html for sake of it.
First thing to do is change the div in list to the following:
<div th:fragment="pageContent">
<p>LIST</p>
</div>
then in your main.html you would call the fragment via:
<div th:include="list::pageContent"></div>
or
<div th:replace="list::pageContent"></div>
Btw "list::pageContent" indicates that its in base folder, if its located in folder called example then it would be "example/list:pageContent".
here is the great example on Thymeleaf website: http://www.thymeleaf.org/doc/usingthymeleaf.html#including-template-fragments
Hope this helps, if not let me know.
I've been trying to add some AJAX/jQuery script to my site so that only the main content loads when you navigate through the site, and hence the navigation at the top will not reload.
This is my site structure:
<div id=container>
<div id="header">
<!-- Header + Navigation Buttons, same throughout the site. -->
</div>
<div id="main">
<!-- content of each page, different on each page. -->
</div>
</div>
Also note that each navigation button leads to an index.php file on a different sub-directory, e.g www.mysite.com/contact, www.mysite.com/comments etc.
How can I make the #header stay throughout the site, so when I click a link in the navigation bar that nav bar doesn't reload, however the #main content does?
I eventually would like to add transitions to the #main content aswell, so when you navigate through the site you'll never see a blank white page while the page is loading - instead you'll always see the nav bar etc. and the #main content would fade in and out.
Previously, I used this:
<script type="text/javascript">
$('#main').load('/subdirectory/ #main');
</script>
But it didn't work (note I did write the correct subdirectory) and the whole page would reload as normal.
If you could help me out I'd greatly appreciate it!
Thanks in advance!
mlazim14
<script type="text/javascript">
$(document).ready(function() {
$('#main').load('/subdirectory/ #main');
});
</script>
That should work. Are you sure the address is correct? Maybe the whole page wasn't loaded yet either. Try this, then 'echo' the contents in the index.php file:
$(function() {
$('#main').load('/comments/index.php');
});
Code inside the above function is executed when the page is ready. See jQuery .ready().
I'm working on an ASP.NET MVC 3 application. I primarily come from a ASP.NET WebForms background. I am working on an application with a complicated layout scheme. Because of this, i was hoping to have all of my layout code in, well, _Layout.cshtml. My challenge is, there is custom javascript logic associated with each page. I've found that if this JavaScript is included in the middle of my page, it doesn't work. So what I wanted to do was move it elsewhere. But in order to do this, I need something similar to the ASP.NET WebForms PlaceHolder control. Ideally, I would like to be able to do something like this:
<body>
<div id="myLayout" style="background-color:Gray; height:100%;">
<div id="myContent" style="background-color:Silver;">
#RenderBody()
</div>
<div id="myFooter" style="background-color:Silver;">
Footer
</div>
</div>
#RenderScript()
</body>
Is there a way for me to do this? Or am I going to have to write every page individually?
Thank you!
Here's what i do, in each of your views create a section like this, put any html you want in it
Any View:
#section Scripts
{
<script src="#Url.Content("~/Scripts/myscript.js")" type="text/javascript"></script>
<!-- Styles, more scripts, etc -->
}
Then back in your _Layout.cshtml you can render the section anywhere you want, the second parameter says if the page requires a Scripts section or not.
_Layout.cshtml: (anywhere you want)
<head>
#RenderSection("Scripts", false)
</head>
I'm using AJAX inside my JSF portlet. When the session expires, We are suppose to get the following message(this is the response of AJAX request when session expires)
This page is used to hold your data while you are being authorized for your request.
You will be forwarded to continue the authorization process. If this does not happen automatically, please click the Continue button below.
<CONTINUE BUTTON>
In IE 6 and 7 I can see the continue button. But in Firefox I don't see that button. Only the text is visible.But in the source code I can see that section, but it is grayed in Firebug.I've the screenshot uploaded to http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/619/firefoxcontinue.jpg
Ideally it should automatically forward the user to the login page, since AJAX cannot redirect that, it just displays the response.So Continue button has to be shown inside the portlet. Can someone please tell me why the HTML form is not shown in Mozilla Firefox.
Thanks
I created a test page. The problem is there when we try to insert the Form inside a table.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> New Document </TITLE>
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="EditPlus">
<META NAME="Author" CONTENT="">
<META NAME="Keywords" CONTENT="">
<META NAME="Description" CONTENT="">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<script type="text/javascript">
function insertAjax(){
// alert('inside ajax');
document.getElementById("wpsportlet").innerHTML='This page is used to hold your data while you are being authorized for your request.<br/><br/>You will be forwarded to continue the authorization process. If this does not happen automatically, please click the Continue button below.<form action="http://www.google.com" method="get" name="AUTOSUBMIT"><input type="submit" value="Continue"/></form>';
}
</script>
<input type=button value="Submit" onclick="insertAjax();">
<div id="wpsportlet">
</div>
</BODY>
</HTML>
If I nest the form inside a table then the Form is not displayed in Firefox. Can someone please help a work around for this.
Your generated DOM is invalid. Character data (text) and <br>, <form> and <script> elements may not be child elements of elements - only <tbody>, <thead> and <tfoot> element may (although in XHTML you can have <tr> elements too).
For those elements to exist inside a table, they must appear entirely within a table cell.
Given broken HTML, Firefox will do a good job of compensating for author errors, but when the broken DOM is generated with JS, you bypass some of the autocorrection routines.
As an aside, your Doctype (HTML + Transitional + No system identifier) triggers Quirks mode - which doesn't generally help matters.
I suggest:
Switch to a Doctype that triggers Standards mode
Validate your markup
Build the content you are adding with JavaScript using plain HTML instead
Make that validate
Write JavaScript to generate the DOM you have now tested as being valid
Why don't you add a button using JavaScript when the response is shown to the screen?
This way should work on all browsers...
function addButton() {
//Create an input type dynamically.
var element = document.createElement('input');
//Assign different attributes to the element.
element.setAttribute('type', 'button');
element.setAttribute('value', 'Continue');
element.setAttribute('name', 'somename');
element.setAttribute('id', 'someid');
var foo = document.getElementById("fooBar");
//Append the element in page
foo.appendChild(element);
}
I have been reading up on this, and it seems that if you use ajax you can only bring in content that resides on the same domain whereas with an iframe you can bring in content from any domain. Is that the case? What other differences are there?
Bear in mind they're two completely separate technologies.
A (i)frame really loads a complete HTML page in area into the browser. Whether the page is on the same or another domain, for pure viewing, doesn't matter.
Ajax only describes a system to facilitate JavaScript to talk with (and with current security restriction across browser, only with) the server from which you document within which you generated the JavaScript call from.
The (i)frame technology loads and renders a complete HTML page from any URL given. Certain security restrictions accessing other documents from other domains with JavaScript still apply.
With Ajax, it's only meant to use purely JavaScript to talk to the originating server (send some data) and usually get some data back. In JavaScript. What this data is and what you do with it, is up to you. Whether you insert it into the DOM (Document Object Model), exchange parts or load a new page is up to you.
To a certain degree you have all freedom you want. You can have an (i)frame on a page, still make a Ajax call and decide to load another URL into the (i)frame. Or use the Ajax return value to generate new HTML dynamically inside the (i)frame. Or outside, in another document.
The security restrictions applying in this case is called "same origin policy".
Quite simply, an iframe is like a regular frame, but it doesn't split the browser window up into sections, it sits right inside a page and is affected by the scrollbar.
Ajax, on the other hand, uses javascript to do partial loads of a page, allowing small amounts of data to be loaded from the server without needing to do a complete postback. For example, Youtube uses Ajax when you post comments, vote, queue videos to play, etc. They do this so that your video isn't interrupted and restarted by a complete page postback.
Besides these differences mentioned by others, there are others as well.
iframe loads an entire html/php page, whether it is from the own server or other external server. Usually, it has a fresh <html>, <head> and <body> tag as well. Ajax only loads part of the html/php page.
Besides, Ajax pulls the CSS (and maybe, even javascript codes) from the parent file, but in case of Iframe, it cannot pull the same.
E.g this is the master file coding.
<!doctype html>
<html>
<head>
<style>
.gappu {background-color:black;color:red;}
</style>
<meta charset="utf-8">
<script src="../AllJqueries/jquery-1.11.3.min.js"></script> <!-- Use your own jQuery file -->
<script>
<!--
$(document).ready(function(){
$.ajax({url:"slave1.php?bare=true", success:function(data){
$(".myDomain").html(data);
}});
}); /* End of Main Jquery */
//-->
</script>
<title>Ajax vs Iframe</title>
</head>
<body>
<div class="myDomain"></div>
<div>Iframe below</div>
<iframe width="100%" height="500px" src="slave1.php"></iframe>
</body>
</html>
Now, we also have another file, named as slave1.php
<?php
if(isset($_GET['bare'])) $bare = $_GET['bare'];
else $bare = false;
if(!$bare):
?>
<!doctype html>
<html>
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8">
<style>
.gappu {background-color:blue;color:yellow;}
</style>
<!-- You can remove the above style later, and see the difference. The parent style will not apply for iframe -->
<title>Inside the Iframe</title>
</head>
<body>
<?php endif; ?>
<div class="gappu">Hi, welcome to this demo</div>
<?php if(!$bare): ?>
</body>
</html>
<?php endif;
In case of Ajax call, the line Hi, welcome to this demo will be in black background and red color, since it is borrowing the css from the parent. But in iframe, it will be in blue background and white color, which is defined in slave1.php. You can remove the style from slave1.php, and you will find plain text printed in iframe format.
Hope this helps. Cheers.
Vijay Srinivas