I'm developing a website in ASP .NET MVC 2 using C#.
I have a partial view, Header.ascx. In there I have an image for my website, MainImage.png.
When I use one of the primary Views I've created, the image shows up fine. For instance, I hit the Index ActionResult of my News Controller. (site.com/News)
However, when I dig deeper, I seem to lose my image, even though the Partial view is being displayed from the Master page. i.e., if I try going to site.com/News/Article/1
Are there any suggestions for keeping my image fully intact, such as a way to do absolute pathing?
The code I currently have in my partial view is here:
<div align="center"><img src="../Content/images/MainImage.png" style="border:none" /></div>
I've tried changing the src to ~/Content/images/MainImage.png but that breaks it all over the site.
Use the Url.Content helper method.
<img src="<%: Url.Content("~/content/images/imagename.png") %>" />
Same applies for when you want to include javascript files or css
<link rel="stylesheet" href="<%= Url.Content("~/content/site.css") %>" type="text/css" />
<script type="text/javascript" src="<%= Url.Content("~/content/scripts.js") %>"></script>
Whenever possible, make the path (href or src) to resource files, like images, CSS and JS relative to the web server root. That is, your URLs should begin with a slash:
<img src="/images/imagename.png" />
That format retains the current server address (which may be an IP address, an internal network address or any of a number of public web addresses), protocol and port, and doesn't depend on the apparent path of the page the user is looking at (which can change, depending on whether the user is accessing the page by its canonical location or by a URL rewrite).
Related
In laravel you can do one of these:
<link rel="stylesheet" href="/css/app.css">
<img src="/storage/img/logo.svg">
<script src="/js/app.js"></script>
<!-- same as the following -->
<link rel="stylesheet" href="{{asset('css/app.css')}}">
<img src="{{asset('storage/img/logo.svg')}}">
<script src="{{asset('js/app.js')}}"></script>
The first is a relative path (relative to the public dir) and the second generates an absolute path.
Besides that, is there any difference in the results? At least in Chrome, Opera, and Firefox I could not perceive any difference.
Is there any advantage of using one over another? Maybe in performance or compability? Does one loads faster than the other?
There are potentially major differences.
The asset helper is CDN-aware. Setting the app.asset_url config value causes asset() to append that URL to every link it generates, which is very useful if you're using a CDN.
In addition, it'll save you a lot of work if your app winds up hosted in a subdirectory - all you have to do is set app.url, and asset will spit out the right URLs to js/app.js (i.e. /a/sub/folder/js/app.js).
I am coming from a PHP/Laravel direction and there we use the blade templating engine to load components into a specific layout like this:
Main Layout called: layout.blade.php
<html>
<head><title>Whatever</title></head>
<body>
#yield('content')
</body>
And then we load our components inside this layout by a file like this, called: content.php
#extends(layout)
#section('content')
<h1>This contents is loaded into the Layout</h1>
<p>Yada yada yada</p>
#stop
In the backend we link the route (lets call it "/content") to a controller that creates this view. And anytime we click on a menu-item with an anchor-tag, we load the views into our layout.
Now with Polymer, this is a different story, because I have no Idea how to go on about.
A layout in polymer looks more like this. Let's call this layout-one.html
<html>
<head><title>Whatever</title></head>
<body>
<core-drawer-panel>
<core-header-panel drawer></core-header-panel>
<core-header-panel content>
<core-toolbar main></core-toolbar>
<div>Main Content goes here...</div>
</core-header-panel>
</core-drawer-panel>
</body>
</html>
It's something like that, I know the structure above might have a mistake, but I am pulling this information out of my head.
Now if I have a different view I want to load inside the "content"-Area, intuitively I would have an achor-tag that loads a "content.html", which in turn would have to have all the html-tags and head-tags and so on... so I would load the complete page, which is counter-intuitive and non-dynamic.
I've seen the Polymer-Team accomplish, what I am trying to accomplish here:
http://www.polymer-project.org/components/core-elements/demo.html#core-scroll-header-panel
Just loading different contents into an existing polymer-layout.
So please in the name of god, can anyone tell me exactly how it is done, because I seriously have no idea at the moment. I am suggesting, that they used something like angular to create the views (because of the hash-tag), but my instinct says, that they made it somehow else.
I would be most glad, if you gave me besides the explanation on how it is done, also any resource on how I would be reproduce this behaviour. Maybe a good article or tutorial.
Thanks mates.
You're looking for the <content> tag. Check out how this works.
simple-layout.html
<polymer-element name="simple-layout" noscript>
<template>
<core-drawer-panel>
<core-header-panel drawer>
<content select=".title"><!-- content with class 'title' --></content>
</core-header-panel>
<core-header-panel content>
<core-toolbar main></core-toolbar>
<content><!-- all other content will show up here --></content>
</core-header-panel>
</core-drawer-panel>
</template>
</polymer-element>
home-page.html
<link rel="import" href="simple-layout.html">
<polymer-element name="home-page" noscript>
<template>
<simple-layout>
<div class="title">Home</div>
<h1>This contents is loaded into the main part of the layout.</h1>
<p>Yada yada yada. More content in the main layout.</p>
</simple-layout>
</template>
</polymer-element>
This way you can load a "page" element and it will include the layout it wants to use.
http://erikringsmuth.github.io/app-router/#/layouts
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>
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 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