I have myself a custom Orchard Token like so
public void Describe(DescribeContext context)
{
context.For("Site", T("Site"), T("Site settings."))
.Token("RootUrl", T("RootUrl"), T("The current site's root url."));
context.For("Topic", T("Topic"), T("Topic contents."))
.Token("Title", T("Title"), T("Title of the topic"));
}
public void Evaluate(EvaluateContext context)
{
context.For("Site", _orchardServices.WorkContext.HttpContext.Request)
.Token("RootUrl", token => _orchardServices.WorkContext.HttpContext.Request.Url.GetLeftPart(UriPartial.Authority));
context.For<IContent>("Topic")
.Token("Title", content =>
{
int id = content.As<CommentPart>().Record.CommentedOn;
var contentItem = _contentManager.Get(id);
return contentItem.As<TitlePart>().Title;
})
.Chain("Title", "Title", content =>
{
int id = content.As<CommentPart>().Record.CommentedOn;
var contentItem = _contentManager.Get(id);
return contentItem.As<TitlePart>().Title;
});
}
In my Orchard CMS I have a rule that sends out an email when a comment is added so in the text box of that email I have typed in
{Topic.Title}
However this is never populated, can anyone bring some light to this dark corner of mine?
What's missing here is context. The code evaluating the tokenized string will provide a context object that will be what the tokens are evaluated against. Typically, there will be a Content object on that context, which is what will be passed into the Content token's Lambda. Here, you're telling the system that if it finds something called "Topic" of type IContent on the context, it should be handled by your logic. Unfortunately, that never happens because such an object is not set onto the context by the calling code.
From your question, it seems like your intention is to get the title of a comment when one is added. You could, I think, just do Content.DisplayText, but if you must develop your own token, attach it to the content token rather than build a new root one that will not get evaluated where you intend. So that would be a Topic token off of Content.
Related
I would like to know the best (and most consistent) way to add redundant bits to my restful uris so that they are more readable while remaining unchanging when some things such as username change.
I read of the concept at this excellent blog post and it is something like what stack overflow does /users/3836923/inkalimeva where the last segment of the URI is redundant and may change but makes the URI more readable and SEO friendly.
Currently I am using Laravel's Route::resource() but that creates routes with only the id segment.
You can use eloquent-sluggable to create slugs for your users. That way the slug will change when they update their username. You can also simply call their username in the url method, though this will result in uglier urls.
This method still requires that you drop Route::resource() and write your routes explicitly.
Here is the code, tested and working:
ROUTES.PHP (don't mind the route details)
Route::get('route-name/{id}/{slugOrUsernameAsYouPlease}', [
'as' => 'admin-confirm-detach-admin',
'uses' => 'AdminController#confirmDetachAdmin'
]);
IN YOUR VIEW
Click me!
OR
Click me!
URL RESULT (My users name here is Fnup. Just for testing)
With Username: http://website.local/route-name/8/Fnup
With Slug: http://website.local/route-name/8/fnup
A quick final note
I just changed fnup's username to fnupper and here is the result:
http://website.local/route-name/8/Fnupper
However the slug didn't change automatically. You have to add that code yourself to the user update method. Otherwise the slug stays as what it was the first time the resource was made. Here is my code when using eloquent-sluggable
public function update(UpdateUserRequest $request)
{
$user = \Auth::user();
$user->name = $request->name;
$user->email = $request->email;
$user->resluggify();
$user->save();
session()->flash('message', 'Din profil er opdateret!');
return redirect()->route('user-show');
}
Which result in: http://website.local/route-name/8/fnupper
New edit per request: Controller method example
Here is my confirmDetachAdmin() method in AdminController.php. Just to clarify, the methods job is to show a "confirm" view before modifying a users status. Just like edit/update & create/store, I made up confirm to accompany destroy (since I'd like a javascript free confirmation option should javascript be disabled).
public function confirmAttachAdmin($id)
{
$user = User::findOrFail($id);
/* Prevent error if user already has role */
if ( $user->hasRole('admin')) {
return redirect()->back();
}
return view('admin.confirmAttachAdmin', compact('user'));
}
You can add your slug/username as a second parameter if you want to, but I don't see a reason, as you can access it from $user when you find them by id.
As opposed to #MartinJH's answer, I don't think you should store your slugs in database if you don't rely only on them in your URIs. A simple link() method on your model, and an explicit route is enough.
App\User
class User extends \Illuminate\Database\Eloquent\Model {
public function link()
{
return route('user-profile', [ $this->id, Str::slug($this->username) ]);
}
}
routes.php
Route::get('{id}/{username}', [ 'as' => 'user-profile', 'uses' => 'UserController#profile' ])
->where('id', '\d+')
->where('username', '[a-zA-Z0-9\-\_]+');
App\Http\Controllers\UserController
...
public function profile($id, $username)
{
$user = \App\User::findOrFail($id);
return view('profile')->with('user', $user);
}
...
I have implemented a CurrentUserPropertyBinder (see below) for a web application using FubuMVC.
public class CurrentUserPropertyBinder : IPropertyBinder
{
private readonly Database _database;
private readonly ISecurityContext _security;
public CurrentUserPropertyBinder(Database database, ISecurityContext security)
{
_database = database;
_security = security;
}
public bool Matches(PropertyInfo property)
{
return property.PropertyType == typeof(User)
&& property.Name == "CurrentUser";
}
public void Bind(PropertyInfo property, IBindingContext context)
{
var currentUser = //check database passing the username to get further user details using _security.CurrentIdentity.Name
property.SetValue(context.Object, currentUser, null);
}
}
When I login to my site, this works fine. The CurrentUserPropertyBinder has all the information it requires to perform the task (i.e. _security.CurrentIdentity.Name has the correct User details in it)
When I try and import a file using fineUploader (http://fineuploader.com/) which opens the standard fileDialog the _security.CurrentIdentity.Name is empty.
It doesn't seem to remember who the user was, I have no idea why. It works for all my other routes but then I import a file it will not remember the user.
Please help! Thanks in Advance
NOTE: We are using FubuMVC.Authentication to authenticate the users
I'm guessing your action for this is excluded from authentication; perhaps it's an AJAX-only endpoint/action. Without seeing what that action looks like, I think you can get away with a simple fix for this, if you've updated FubuMVC.Authentication in the past 3 months or so.
You need to enable pass-through authentication for this action. Out of the box, FubuMVC.Auth only wires up the IPrincipal for actions that require authentication. If you want access to that information from other actions, you have to enable the pass-through filter. Here are some quick ways to do that.
Adorn your endpoint/controller class, this specific action method, or the input model for this action with the [PassThroughAuthentication] attribute to opt-in to pass-through auth.
[PassThroughAuthentication]
public AjaxContinuation post_upload_file(UploadInputModel input) { ... }
or
[PassThroughAuthentication]
public class UploadInputModel { ... }
Alter the AuthenticationSettings to match the action call for pass-through in your FubuRegistry during bootstrap.
...
AlterSettings<AuthenticationSettings>(x => {
// Persistent cookie lasts 3 days ("remember me").
x.ExpireInMinutes = 4320;
// Many ways to filter here.
x.PassThroughChains.InputTypeIs<UploadInputModel>();
});
Check /_fubu/endpoints to ensure that the chain with your action call has the pass-through or authentication filter applied.
I have a rather complex form in the way that the number of form fields is flexibel. In short, the model object is a TLabel (TranslationLabel) that contains a Map of values (translations). Language here is an enum so the idea is that the number of fields (text areas) for which a translation is given depends on the values in this enum.
This is my form (simplified):
public class TranslationEditForm extends Form {
private final static List<Language> LANGUAGES = newArrayList(Language.values());
public TranslationEditForm(String id, final TranslationLabelView label) {
super(id, new CompoundPropertyModel<TranslationLabelView>(label));
ListView<Language> textAreas = new ListView<Language>("translationRepeater", LANGUAGES) {
#Override
protected void populateItem(final ListItem<Language> itemLang) {
//loop through the languages and create 1 textarea per language
itemLang.add(new Label("language", itemLang.getModelObject().toString()));
Model<String> textModel = new Model<String>() {
#Override
public String getObject() {
//return the value for current language
return label.getValue(itemLang.getModelObject());
}
#Override
public void setObject(String object) {
//set the value for current language
label.getTranslations().put(itemLang.getModelObject(), object);
}
};
itemLang.add(new TextArea<String>("value", textModel).setRequired(true));
}
};
//add the repeater containing a textarea per language to the form
this.add(textAreas);
}
}
Now, it works fine, 1 text area is created per language and its value is also set nicely; even more when changed the model gets updated as intended.
If you submit the form after emptying a text area (so originally there was a value) then of course there is a validation error (required). Normal (wicket) behaviour would be that the invalid field is still empty but for some reason the original value is reset and I don't understand why.
If I override onError like this:
#Override
protected void onError() {
this.updateFormComponentModels();
}
then it is fine, the value of the field is set to the submitted value (empty) instead of the original value.
Any idea what is causing this? What is wicket failing to do because the way I've set up the form (because with a simple form/model this is working fine as are the wicket examples)?
Posted as answer, so the question can be marked as solved:
ListView does recreate all its items at render time. This means that the validation will be broken. Have a look at API doc of the ListView
Calling setReuseItems() on the ListView solves this.
Regards,
Bert
My MVC2 app uses a component that makes subsequent AJAX calls back to the same action, which causes all kinds of unnecessary data access and processing on the server. The component vendor suggests I re-route those subsequent requests to a different action. The subsequent requests differ in that they have a particular query string, and I want to know whether I can put constraints on the query string in my route table.
For example, the initial request comes in with a URL like http://localhost/document/display/1. This can be handled by the default route. I want to write a custom route to handle URLs like http://localhost/document/display/1?vendorParam1=blah1&script=blah.js and http://localhost/document/display/1?vendorParam2=blah2&script=blah.js by detecting "vendor" in the URL.
I tried the following, but it throws a System.ArgumentException: The route URL cannot start with a '/' or '~' character and it cannot contain a '?' character.:
routes.MapRoute(
null,
"Document/Display/{id}?{args}",
new { controller = "OtherController", action = "OtherAction" },
new RouteValueDictionary { { "args", "vendor" } });
Can I write a route that takes the query string into account? If not, do you have any other ideas?
Update: Put simply, can I write routing constraints such that http://localhost/document/display/1 is routed to the DocumentController.Display action but http://localhost/document/display/1?vendorParam1=blah1&script=blah.js is routed to the VendorController.Display action? Eventually, I would like any URL whose query string contains "vendor" to be routed to the VendorController.Display action.
I understand the first URL can be handled by the default route, but what about the second? Is it possible to do this at all? After lots of trial and error on my part, it looks like the answer is "No".
QueryString parameters can be used in constraints, although it's not supported by default. Here you can find an article describing how to implement this in ASP.NET MVC 2.
As it is in Dutch, here's the implementation. Add an 'IRouteConstraint' class:
public class QueryStringConstraint : IRouteConstraint
{
private readonly Regex _regex;
public QueryStringConstraint(string regex)
{
_regex = new Regex(regex, RegexOptions.IgnoreCase);
}
public bool Match (HttpContextBase httpContext, Route route, string parameterName, RouteValueDictionary values, RouteDirection routeDirection)
{
// check whether the paramname is in the QS collection
if(httpContext.Request.QueryString.AllKeys.Contains(parameterName))
{
// validate on the given regex
return _regex.Match(httpContext.Request.QueryString[parameterName]).Success;
}
// or return false
return false;
}
}
Now you can use this in your routes:
routes.MapRoute("object-contact",
"{aanbod}",
/* ... */,
new { pagina = new QueryStringConstraint("some|constraint") });
You don't need a route for this. It is already handled by the default model binder. Query string parameters will be automatically bound to action arguments:
public ActionResult Foo(string id, string script, string vendorname)
{
// the id parameter will be bound from the default route token
// script and vendorname parameters will be bound from the request string
...
}
UPDATE:
If you don't know the name of the query string parameters that will be passed you could loop through them:
foreach (string key in Request.QueryString.Keys)
{
string value = Request.QueryString[key];
}
This post is old, but couldn't you write a route before your default route
this would only catch routes with "vendor" in the args
routes.MapRoute(
null,
"Document/Display/{id}?{args}",
new { controller = "VendorController", action = "OtherAction" },
new {args=#".*(vendor).*"}//believe this is correct regex to catch "vendor" anywhere in the args
);
And This would catch the rest
routes.MapRoute(
null,
"Document/Display/{id}?{args}",
new { controller = "DisplayController", action = "OtherAction" }
);
Haven't tried this and I am a novice to MVC but I believe this should work?? From what I understand if the constraint doesn't match the route isn't used. So it would test the next route. Since your next route doesn't use any constraint on the args, it should, match the route.
I tried this out and it worked for me.
I want to password protect a webpage in Wicket so the user may only access it if he/she has logged in.
I'd also like the page to show the login page, and then after logging in the original page the user was trying to get to.
How is this done with wicket? I've already created a login page and extended the session class.
The framework-supplied way is to provide an IAuthorizationStrategy instance for your application, e.g., by adding to your Application init() method:
init() {
...
getSecuritySettings().setAuthorizationStrategy(...)
}
A working example of Wickets authorization functionality is on Wicket Stuff here, which demonstrates some reasonably complex stuff. For really simple cases, have a look at the SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy. At a very basic level, this could be used like so (taken from the linked Javadoc):
SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy authorizationStrategy = new SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy(
MySecureWebPage.class, MySignInPage.class)
{
protected boolean isAuthorized()
{
// Authorize access based on user authentication in the session
return (((MySession)Session.get()).isSignedIn());
}
};
getSecuritySettings().setAuthorizationStrategy(authorizationStrategy);
Edit in response to comment
I think the best way forward, if you're just going to use something like SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy rather than that class itself. I did something like this to capture pages that are annotated with a custom annotation:
IAuthorizationStrategy authorizationStrategy = new AbstractPageAuthorizationStrategy()
{
protected boolean isPageAuthorized(java.lang.Class<Page.class> pageClass)
{
if (pageClass.getAnnotation(Protected.class) != null) {
return (((MySession)Session.get()).isSignedIn());
} else {
return true;
}
}
};
Then you'd need to register an IUnauthorizedComponentInstantiationListener similar to what is done in SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy (link is to the source code), which should be something like:
new IUnauthorizedComponentInstantiationListener()
{
public void onUnauthorizedInstantiation(final Component component)
{
if (component instanceof Page)
{
throw new RestartResponseAtInterceptPageException(MySignInPage.class);
}
else
{
throw new UnauthorizedInstantiationException(component.getClass());
}
}
});