Search Results

Search found 15206 results on 609 pages for 'identity map pattern'.

Page 141/609 | < Previous Page | 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148  | Next Page >

  • How to implement the API/SPI Pattern in Java?

    - by Adam Tannon
    I am creating a framework that exposes an API for developers to use: public interface MyAPI { public void doSomeStuff(); public int getWidgets(boolean hasRun); } All the developers should have to do is code their projects against these API methods. I also want them to be able to place different "drivers"/"API bindings" on the runtime classpath (the same way JDBC or SLF4J work) and have the API method calls (doSomeStuff(), etc.) operate on different 3rd party resources (files, servers, whatever). Thus the same code and API calls will map to operations on different resources depending on what driver/binding the runtime classpath sees (i.e. myapi-ftp, myapi-ssh, myapi-teleportation). How do I write (and package) an SPI that allows for such runtime binding, and then maps MyAPI calls to the correct (concrete) implementation? In other words, if myapi-ftp allows you to getWidgets(boolean) from an FTP server, how would I could this up (to make use of both the API and SPI)? Bonus points for concrete, working Java code example! Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • How do I deal with different requests that map to the same response?

    - by daxim
    I'm designing a Web service. The request is idempotent, so I chose the GET method. The response is relatively expensive to calculate and not small, so I want to get caching (on the protocol level) right. (Don't worry about memoisation at my part, I have that already covered; my question here is actually also paying attention to the Web as a whole.) There's only one mandatory parameter and a number of optional parameter with default values if missing. For example, the following two map to the same representation of the response. (If this is a dumb way to go about it the interface, propose something better.) GET /service?mandatory_parameter=some_data HTTP/1.1 GET /service?mandatory_parameter=some_data;optional_parameter=default1;another_optional_parameter=default2;yet_another_optional_parameter=default3 HTTP/1.1 However, I imagine clients do not know this and would treat them separate and therefore waste cache storage. What should I do to avoid violating the golden rule of caching? Make up a canonical form, document it (e.g. all parameters are required after all and need to be sorted in a specific order) and return a client error unless the required form is met? Instead of an error, redirect permanently to the canonical form of a request? Or is it enough to not mind how the request looks like, and just respond with the same ETag for same responses?

    Read the article

  • How to map this class in NHibernate (not FluentNHibernate)?

    - by JMSA
    Suppose I have a database like this: This is set up to give role-wise menu permissions. Please note that, User-table has no direct relationship with Permission-table. Then how should I map this class against the database-tables? class User { public int ID { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public string Username { get; set; } public string Password { get; set; } public bool? IsActive { get; set; } public IList<Role> RoleItems { get; set; } public IList<Permission> PermissionItems { get; set; } public IList<string> MenuItemKeys { get; set; } } This means, (1) Every user has some Roles. (2) Every user has some Permissions (depending on to Roles). (3) Every user has some permitted MenuItemKeys (according to Permissions). How should my User.hbm.xml look like?

    Read the article

  • DB Design Pattern - Many to many classification / categorised tagging.

    - by Robin Day
    I have an existing database design that stores Job Vacancies. The "Vacancy" table has a number of fixed fields across all clients, such as "Title", "Description", "Salary range". There is an EAV design for "Custom" fields that the Clients can setup themselves, such as, "Manager Name", "Working Hours". The field names are stored in a "ClientText" table and the data stored in a "VacancyClientText" table with VacancyId, ClientTextId and Value. Lastly there is a many to many EAV design for custom tagging / categorising the vacancies with things such as Locations/Offices the vacancy is in, a list of skills required. This is stored as a "ClientCategory" table listing the types of tag, "Locations, Skills", a "ClientCategoryItem" table listing the valid values for each Category, e.g., "London,Paris,New York,Rome", "C#,VB,PHP,Python". Finally there is a "VacancyClientCategoryItem" table with VacancyId and ClientCategoryItemId for each of the selected items for the vacancy. There are no limits to the number of custom fields or custom categories that the client can add. I am now designing a new system that is very similar to the existing system, however, I have the ability to restrict the number of custom fields a Client can have and it's being built from scratch so I have no legacy issues to deal with. For the Custom Fields my solution is simple, I have 5 additional columns on the Vacancy Table called CustomField1-5. This removes one of the EAV designs. It is with the tagging / categorising design that I am struggling. If I limit a client to having 5 categories / types of tag. Should I create 5 tables listing the possible values "CustomCategoryItems1-5" and then an additional 5 many to many tables "VacancyCustomCategoryItem1-5" This would result in 10 tables performing the same storage as the three tables in the existing system. Also, should (heaven forbid) the requirements change in that I need 6 custom categories rather than 5 then this will result in a lot of code change. Therefore, can anyone suggest any DB Design Patterns that would be more suitable to storing such data. I'm happy to stick with the EAV approach, however, the existing system has come across all the usual performance issues and complex queries associated with such a design. Any advice / suggestions are much appreciated. The DBMS system used is SQL Server 2005, however, 2008 is an option if required for any particular pattern.

    Read the article

  • How to implement a caching model without violating MVC pattern?

    - by RPM1984
    Hi Guys, I have an ASP.NET MVC 3 (Razor) Web Application, with a particular page which is highly database intensive, and user experience is of the upmost priority. Thus, i am introducing caching on this particular page. I'm trying to figure out a way to implement this caching pattern whilst keeping my controller thin, like it currently is without caching: public PartialViewResult GetLocationStuff(SearchPreferences searchPreferences) { var results = _locationService.FindStuffByCriteria(searchPreferences); return PartialView("SearchResults", results); } As you can see, the controller is very thin, as it should be. It doesn't care about how/where it is getting it's info from - that is the job of the service. A couple of notes on the flow of control: Controllers get DI'ed a particular Service, depending on it's area. In this example, this controller get's a LocationService Services call through to an IQueryable<T> Repository and materialize results into T or ICollection<T>. How i want to implement caching: I can't use Output Caching - for a few reasons. First of all, this action method is invoked from the client-side (jQuery/AJAX), via [HttpPost], which according to HTTP standards should not be cached as a request. Secondly, i don't want to cache purely based on the HTTP request arguments - the cache logic is a lot more complicated than that - there is actually two-level caching going on. As i hint to above, i need to use regular data-caching, e.g Cache["somekey"] = someObj;. I don't want to implement a generic caching mechanism where all calls via the service go through the cache first - i only want caching on this particular action method. First thought's would tell me to create another service (which inherits LocationService), and provide the caching workflow there (check cache first, if not there call db, add to cache, return result). That has two problems: The services are basic Class Libraries - no references to anything extra. I would need to add a reference to System.Web here. I would have to access the HTTP Context outside of the web application, which is considered bad practice, not only for testability, but in general - right? I also thought about using the Models folder in the Web Application (which i currently use only for ViewModels), but having a cache service in a models folder just doesn't sound right. So - any ideas? Is there a MVC-specific thing (like Action Filter's, for example) i can use here? General advice/tips would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • [NHibernate and ASP.NET MVC] How can I implement a robust session-per-request pattern in my project,

    - by Guillaume Gervais
    I'm currently building an ASP.NET MVC project, with NHibernate as its persistance layer. For now, some functionnalities have been implemented, but only use local NHibernate sessions: each method that accessed the database (read or write) needs to instanciate its own NHibernate session, with the "using()" directive. The problem is that I want to leverage NHibernate's Lazy-Loading capabilities to improve the performance of my project. This implies an open NHibernate session per request until the view is rendered. Furthermore, simultaneous request must be supported (multiple Sessions at the same time). How can I achieve that as cleanly as possible? I searched the Web a little bit and learned about the session-per-request pattern. Most of the implementations I saw used some sort of Http* (HttpContext, etc.) object to store the session. Also, using the Application_BeginRequest/Application_EndRequest functions is complicated, since they get fired for each HTTP request (aspx files, css files, js files, etc.), when I only want to instanciate a session once per request. The concern that I have is that I don't want my views or controllers to have access to NHibernate sessions (or, more generally, NHibernate namespaces and code). That means that I do not want to handle sessions at the controller level nor the view one. I have a few options in mind. Which one seems the best ? Use interceptors (like in GRAILS) that get triggered before and after the controller action. These would open and close sessions/transactions. Is it possible in the ASP.NET MVC world? Use the CurrentSessionContext Singleton provided by NHibernate in a Web context. Using this page as an example, I think this is quite promising, but that still requires filters at the controller level. Use the HttpContext.Current.Items to store the request session. This, coupled with a few lines of code in Global.asax.cs, can easily provide me with a session on the request level. However, it means that dependencies will be injected between NHibernate and my views (HttpContext). Thank you very much!

    Read the article

  • Maintaining shared service in ASP.NET MVC Application

    - by kazimanzurrashid
    Depending on the application sometimes we have to maintain some shared service throughout our application. Let’s say you are developing a multi-blog supported blog engine where both the controller and view must know the currently visiting blog, it’s setting , user information and url generation service. In this post, I will show you how you can handle this kind of case in most convenient way. First, let see the most basic way, we can create our PostController in the following way: public class PostController : Controller { public PostController(dependencies...) { } public ActionResult Index(string blogName, int? page) { BlogInfo blog = blogSerivce.FindByName(blogName); if (blog == null) { return new NotFoundResult(); } IEnumerable<PostInfo> posts = postService.FindPublished(blog.Id, PagingCalculator.StartIndex(page, blog.PostPerPage), blog.PostPerPage); int count = postService.GetPublishedCount(blog.Id); UserInfo user = null; if (HttpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated) { user = userService.FindByName(HttpContext.User.Identity.Name); } return View(new IndexViewModel(urlResolver, user, blog, posts, count, page)); } public ActionResult Archive(string blogName, int? page, ArchiveDate archiveDate) { BlogInfo blog = blogSerivce.FindByName(blogName); if (blog == null) { return new NotFoundResult(); } IEnumerable<PostInfo> posts = postService.FindArchived(blog.Id, archiveDate, PagingCalculator.StartIndex(page, blog.PostPerPage), blog.PostPerPage); int count = postService.GetArchivedCount(blog.Id, archiveDate); UserInfo user = null; if (HttpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated) { user = userService.FindByName(HttpContext.User.Identity.Name); } return View(new ArchiveViewModel(urlResolver, user, blog, posts, count, page, achiveDate)); } public ActionResult Tag(string blogName, string tagSlug, int? page) { BlogInfo blog = blogSerivce.FindByName(blogName); if (blog == null) { return new NotFoundResult(); } TagInfo tag = tagService.FindBySlug(blog.Id, tagSlug); if (tag == null) { return new NotFoundResult(); } IEnumerable<PostInfo> posts = postService.FindPublishedByTag(blog.Id, tag.Id, PagingCalculator.StartIndex(page, blog.PostPerPage), blog.PostPerPage); int count = postService.GetPublishedCountByTag(tag.Id); UserInfo user = null; if (HttpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated) { user = userService.FindByName(HttpContext.User.Identity.Name); } return View(new TagViewModel(urlResolver, user, blog, posts, count, page, tag)); } } As you can see the above code heavily depends upon the current blog and the blog retrieval code is duplicated in all of the action methods, once the blog is retrieved the same blog is passed in the view model. Other than the blog the view also needs the current user and url resolver to render it properly. One way to remove the duplicate blog retrieval code is to create a custom model binder which converts the blog from a blog name and use the blog a parameter in the action methods instead of the string blog name, but it only helps the first half in the above scenario, the action methods still have to pass the blog, user and url resolver etc in the view model. Now lets try to improve the the above code, first lets create a new class which would contain the shared services, lets name it as BlogContext: public class BlogContext { public BlogInfo Blog { get; set; } public UserInfo User { get; set; } public IUrlResolver UrlResolver { get; set; } } Next, we will create an interface, IContextAwareService: public interface IContextAwareService { BlogContext Context { get; set; } } The idea is, whoever needs these shared services needs to implement this interface, in our case both the controller and the view model, now we will create an action filter which will be responsible for populating the context: public class PopulateBlogContextAttribute : FilterAttribute, IActionFilter { private static string blogNameRouteParameter = "blogName"; private readonly IBlogService blogService; private readonly IUserService userService; private readonly BlogContext context; public PopulateBlogContextAttribute(IBlogService blogService, IUserService userService, IUrlResolver urlResolver) { Invariant.IsNotNull(blogService, "blogService"); Invariant.IsNotNull(userService, "userService"); Invariant.IsNotNull(urlResolver, "urlResolver"); this.blogService = blogService; this.userService = userService; context = new BlogContext { UrlResolver = urlResolver }; } public static string BlogNameRouteParameter { [DebuggerStepThrough] get { return blogNameRouteParameter; } [DebuggerStepThrough] set { blogNameRouteParameter = value; } } public void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { string blogName = (string) filterContext.Controller.ValueProvider.GetValue(BlogNameRouteParameter).ConvertTo(typeof(string), Culture.Current); if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(blogName)) { context.Blog = blogService.FindByName(blogName); } if (context.Blog == null) { filterContext.Result = new NotFoundResult(); return; } if (filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated) { context.User = userService.FindByName(filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.Name); } IContextAwareService controller = filterContext.Controller as IContextAwareService; if (controller != null) { controller.Context = context; } } public void OnActionExecuted(ActionExecutedContext filterContext) { Invariant.IsNotNull(filterContext, "filterContext"); if ((filterContext.Exception == null) || filterContext.ExceptionHandled) { IContextAwareService model = filterContext.Controller.ViewData.Model as IContextAwareService; if (model != null) { model.Context = context; } } } } As you can see we are populating the context in the OnActionExecuting, which executes just before the controllers action methods executes, so by the time our action methods executes the context is already populated, next we are are assigning the same context in the view model in OnActionExecuted method which executes just after we set the  model and return the view in our action methods. Now, lets change the view models so that it implements this interface: public class IndexViewModel : IContextAwareService { // More Codes } public class ArchiveViewModel : IContextAwareService { // More Codes } public class TagViewModel : IContextAwareService { // More Codes } and the controller: public class PostController : Controller, IContextAwareService { public PostController(dependencies...) { } public BlogContext Context { get; set; } public ActionResult Index(int? page) { IEnumerable<PostInfo> posts = postService.FindPublished(Context.Blog.Id, PagingCalculator.StartIndex(page, Context.Blog.PostPerPage), Context.Blog.PostPerPage); int count = postService.GetPublishedCount(Context.Blog.Id); return View(new IndexViewModel(posts, count, page)); } public ActionResult Archive(int? page, ArchiveDate archiveDate) { IEnumerable<PostInfo> posts = postService.FindArchived(Context.Blog.Id, archiveDate, PagingCalculator.StartIndex(page, Context.Blog.PostPerPage), Context.Blog.PostPerPage); int count = postService.GetArchivedCount(Context.Blog.Id, archiveDate); return View(new ArchiveViewModel(posts, count, page, achiveDate)); } public ActionResult Tag(string blogName, string tagSlug, int? page) { TagInfo tag = tagService.FindBySlug(Context.Blog.Id, tagSlug); if (tag == null) { return new NotFoundResult(); } IEnumerable<PostInfo> posts = postService.FindPublishedByTag(Context.Blog.Id, tag.Id, PagingCalculator.StartIndex(page, Context.Blog.PostPerPage), Context.Blog.PostPerPage); int count = postService.GetPublishedCountByTag(tag.Id); return View(new TagViewModel(posts, count, page, tag)); } } Now, the last thing where we have to glue everything, I will be using the AspNetMvcExtensibility to register the action filter (as there is no better way to inject the dependencies in action filters). public class RegisterFilters : RegisterFiltersBase { private static readonly Type controllerType = typeof(Controller); private static readonly Type contextAwareType = typeof(IContextAwareService); protected override void Register(IFilterRegistry registry) { TypeCatalog controllers = new TypeCatalogBuilder() .Add(GetType().Assembly) .Include(type => controllerType.IsAssignableFrom(type) && contextAwareType.IsAssignableFrom(type)); registry.Register<PopulateBlogContextAttribute>(controllers); } } Thoughts and Comments?

    Read the article

  • An offscreen MKMapView behaves differently in 3.2, 4.0

    - by Duane Fields
    In 3.1 I've been using an "offscreen" MKMapView to create map images that I can rotate, crop and so forth before presenting them the user. In 3.2 and 4.0 this technique no longer works quite right. Here's some code that illustrates the problem, followed by my theory. // create map view _mapView = [[MKMapView alloc] initWithFrame:CGRectMake(0, 0, MAP_FRAME_SIZE, MAP_FRAME_SIZE)]; _mapView.zoomEnabled = NO; _mapView.scrollEnabled = NO; _mapView.delegate = self; _mapView.mapType = MKMapTypeSatellite; // zoom in to something enough to fill the screen MKCoordinateRegion region; CLLocationCoordinate2D center = {30.267222, -97.763889}; region.center = center; MKCoordinateSpan span = {0.1, 0.1 }; region.span = span; _mapView.region = region; // set scrollview content size to full the imageView _scrollView.contentSize = _imageView.frame.size; // force it to load #ifndef __IPHONE_3_2 // in 3.1 we can render to an offscreen context to force a load UIGraphicsBeginImageContext(_mapView.frame.size); [_mapView.layer renderInContext:UIGraphicsGetCurrentContext()]; UIGraphicsEndImageContext(); #else // in 3.2 and above, the renderInContext trick doesn't work... // this at least causes the map to render, but it's clipped to what appears to be // the viewPort size, plus some padding [self.view addSubview:_mapView]; #endif when the map is done loading, I snap picture of it and stuff it in my scrollview - (void)mapViewDidFinishLoadingMap:(MKMapView *)mapView { NSLog(@"[MapBuilder] mapViewDidFinishLoadingMap"); // render the map to a UIImage UIGraphicsBeginImageContext(mapView.bounds.size); // the first sub layer is just the map, the second is the google layer, this sublayer structure might change of course [[[mapView.layer sublayers] objectAtIndex:0] renderInContext:UIGraphicsGetCurrentContext()]; // we are done with the mapView at this point, we need its ram! _mapView.delegate = nil; [_mapView release]; [_mapView removeFromSuperview]; _mapView = nil; UIImage* mapImage = [UIGraphicsGetImageFromCurrentImageContext() retain]; UIGraphicsEndImageContext(); _imageView.image = mapImage; [mapImage release], mapImage = nil; } The first problem is that in 3.1 rendering to a context would trigger the map to begin loading. This no longer works in 3.2, 4.0. The only thing I have found would trigger the load is to temporarily add the map to the view (i.e. make it visible). The problem being that the map only renders to the visible area of the screen, plus a little padding. The frame/bounds are fine, but it appears to be "helpfully" optimizes the loading to limit the tiles to those visible on the screen or close to it. Any ideas how to force the map to load at full size? Anyone else have this issue?

    Read the article

  • Tip/Trick: Fix Common SEO Problems Using the URL Rewrite Extension

    - by ScottGu
    Search engine optimization (SEO) is important for any publically facing web-site.  A large % of traffic to sites now comes directly from search engines, and improving your site’s search relevancy will lead to more users visiting your site from search engine queries.  This can directly or indirectly increase the money you make through your site. This blog post covers how you can use the free Microsoft URL Rewrite Extension to fix a bunch of common SEO problems that your site might have.  It takes less than 15 minutes (and no code changes) to apply 4 simple URL Rewrite rules to your site, and in doing so cause search engines to drive more visitors and traffic to your site.  The techniques below work equally well with both ASP.NET Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC based sites.  They also works with all versions of ASP.NET (and even work with non-ASP.NET content). [In addition to blogging, I am also now using Twitter for quick updates and to share links. Follow me at: twitter.com/scottgu] Measuring the SEO of your website with the Microsoft SEO Toolkit A few months ago I blogged about the free SEO Toolkit that we’ve shipped.  This useful tool enables you to automatically crawl/scan your site for SEO correctness, and it then flags any SEO issues it finds.  I highly recommend downloading and using the tool against any public site you work on.  It makes it easy to spot SEO issues you might have in your site, and pinpoint ways to optimize it further. Below is a simple example of a report I ran against one of my sites (www.scottgu.com) prior to applying the URL Rewrite rules I’ll cover later in this blog post:   Search Relevancy and URL Splitting Two of the important things that search engines evaluate when assessing your site’s “search relevancy” are: How many other sites link to your content.  Search engines assume that if a lot of people around the web are linking to your content, then it is likely useful and so weight it higher in relevancy. The uniqueness of the content it finds on your site.  If search engines find that the content is duplicated in multiple places around the Internet (or on multiple URLs on your site) then it is likely to drop the relevancy of the content. One of the things you want to be very careful to avoid when building public facing sites is to not allow different URLs to retrieve the same content within your site.  Doing so will hurt with both of the situations above.  In particular, allowing external sites to link to the same content with multiple URLs will cause your link-count and page-ranking to be split up across those different URLs (and so give you a smaller page rank than what it would otherwise be if it was just one URL).  Not allowing external sites to link to you in different ways sounds easy in theory – but you might wonder what exactly this means in practice and how you avoid it. 4 Really Common SEO Problems Your Sites Might Have Below are 4 really common scenarios that can cause your site to inadvertently expose multiple URLs for the same content.  When this happens external sites linking to yours will end up splitting their page links across multiple URLs - and as a result cause you to have a lower page ranking with search engines than you deserve. SEO Problem #1: Default Document IIS (and other web servers) supports the concept of a “default document”.  This allows you to avoid having to explicitly specify the page you want to serve at either the root of the web-site/application, or within a sub-directory.  This is convenient – but means that by default this content is available via two different publically exposed URLs (which is bad).  For example: http://scottgu.com/ http://scottgu.com/default.aspx SEO Problem #2: Different URL Casings Web developers often don’t realize URLs are case sensitive to search engines on the web.  This means that search engines will treat the following links as two completely different URLs: http://scottgu.com/Albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx SEO Problem #3: Trailing Slashes Consider the below two URLs – they might look the same at first, but they are subtly different. The trailing slash creates yet another situation that causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and so split search rankings: http://scottgu.com http://scottgu.com/ SEO Problem #4: Canonical Host Names Sometimes sites support scenarios where they support a web-site with both a leading “www” hostname prefix as well as just the hostname itself.  This causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and split search rankling: http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx/ http://www.scottgu.com/albums.aspx/ How to Easily Fix these SEO Problems in 10 minutes (or less) using IIS Rewrite If you haven’t been careful when coding your sites, chances are you are suffering from one (or more) of the above SEO problems.  Addressing these issues will improve your search engine relevancy ranking and drive more traffic to your site. The “good news” is that fixing the above 4 issues is really easy using the URL Rewrite Extension.  This is a completely free Microsoft extension available for IIS 7.x (on Windows Server 2008, Windows Server 2008 R2, Windows 7 and Windows Vista).  The great thing about using the IIS Rewrite extension is that it allows you to fix the above problems *without* having to change any code within your applications.  You can easily install the URL Rewrite Extension in under 3 minutes using the Microsoft Web Platform Installer (a free tool we ship that automates setting up web servers and development machines).  Just click the green “Install Now” button on the URL Rewrite Spotlight page to install it on your Windows Server 2008, Windows 7 or Windows Vista machine: Once installed you’ll find that a new “URL Rewrite” icon is available within the IIS 7 Admin Tool: Double-clicking the icon will open up the URL Rewrite admin panel – which will display the list of URL Rewrite rules configured for a particular application or site: Notice that our rewrite rule list above is currently empty (which is the default when you first install the extension).  We can click the “Add Rule…” link button in the top-right of the panel to add and enable new URL Rewriting logic for our site.  Scenario 1: Handling Default Document Scenarios One of the SEO problems I discussed earlier in this post was the scenario where the “default document” feature of IIS causes you to inadvertently expose two URLs for the same content on your site.  For example: http://scottgu.com/ http://scottgu.com/default.aspx We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the second URL to instead go to the first one.  We will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve.  Let’s look at how we can create such a rule.  We’ll begin by clicking the “Add Rule” link in the screenshot above.  This will cause the below dialog to display: We’ll select the “Blank Rule” template within the “Inbound rules” section to create a new custom URL Rewriting rule.  This will display an empty pane like below: Don’t worry – setting up the above rule is easy.  The following 4 steps explain how to do so: Step 1: Name the Rule Our first step will be to name the rule we are creating.  Naming it with a descriptive name will make it easier to find and understand later.  Let’s name this rule our “Default Document URL Rewrite” rule: Step 2: Setup the Regular Expression that Matches this Rule Our second step will be to specify a regular expression filter that will cause this rule to execute when an incoming URL matches the regex pattern.   Don’t worry if you aren’t good with regular expressions - I suck at them too. The trick is to know someone who is good at them or copy/paste them from a web-site.  Below we are going to specify the following regular expression as our pattern rule: (.*?)/?Default\.aspx$ This pattern will match any URL string that ends with Default.aspx. The "(.*?)" matches any preceding character zero or more times. The "/?" part says to match the slash symbol zero or one times. The "$" symbol at the end will ensure that the pattern will only match strings that end with Default.aspx.  Combining all these regex elements allows this rule to work not only for the root of your web site (e.g. http://scottgu.com/default.aspx) but also for any application or subdirectory within the site (e.g. http://scottgu.com/photos/default.aspx.  Because the “ignore case” checkbox is selected it will match both “Default.aspx” as well as “default.aspx” within the URL.   One nice feature built-into the rule editor is a “Test pattern” button that you can click to bring up a dialog that allows you to test out a few URLs with the rule you are configuring: Above I've added a “products/default.aspx” URL and clicked the “Test” button.  This will give me immediate feedback on whether the rule will execute for it.  Step 3: Setup a Permanent Redirect Action We’ll then setup an action to occur when our regular expression pattern matches the incoming URL: In the dialog above I’ve changed the “Action Type” drop down to be a “Redirect” action.  The “Redirect Type” will be a HTTP 301 Permanent redirect – which means search engines will follow it. I’ve also set the “Redirect URL” property to be: {R:1}/ This indicates that we want to redirect the web client requesting the original URL to a new URL that has the originally requested URL path - minus the "Default.aspx" in it.  For example, requests for http://scottgu.com/default.aspx will be redirected to http://scottgu.com/, and requests for http://scottgu.com/photos/default.aspx will be redirected to http://scottgu.com/photos/ The "{R:N}" regex construct, where N >= 0, is called a back-reference and N is the back-reference index. In the case of our pattern "(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$", if the input URL is "products/Default.aspx" then {R:0} will contain "products/Default.aspx" and {R:1} will contain "products".  We are going to use this {R:1}/ value to be the URL we redirect users to.  Step 4: Apply and Save the Rule Our final step is to click the “Apply” button in the top right hand of the IIS admin tool – which will cause the tool to persist the URL Rewrite rule into our application’s root web.config file (under a <system.webServer/rewrite> configuration section): <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Because IIS 7.x and ASP.NET share the same web.config files, you can actually just copy/paste the above code into your web.config files using Visual Studio and skip the need to run the admin tool entirely.  This also makes adding/deploying URL Rewrite rules with your ASP.NET applications really easy. Step 5: Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://scottgu.com/ http://scottgu.com/default.aspx Notice that the second URL automatically redirects to the first one.  Because it is a permanent redirect, search engines will follow the URL and should update the page ranking of http://scottgu.com to include links to http://scottgu.com/default.aspx as well. Scenario 2: Different URL Casing Another common SEO problem I discussed earlier in this post is that URLs are case sensitive to search engines on the web.  This means that search engines will treat the following links as two completely different URLs: http://scottgu.com/Albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the first URL to instead go to the second (all lower-case) one.  Like before, we will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve. To create such a rule we’ll click the “Add Rule” link in the URL Rewrite admin tool again.  This will cause the “Add Rule” dialog to appear again: Unlike the previous scenario (where we created a “Blank Rule”), with this scenario we can take advantage of a built-in “Enforce lowercase URLs” rule template.  When we click the “ok” button we’ll see the following dialog which asks us if we want to create a rule that enforces the use of lowercase letters in URLs: When we click the “Yes” button we’ll get a pre-written rule that automatically performs a permanent redirect if an incoming URL has upper-case characters in it – and automatically send users to a lower-case version of the URL: We can click the “Apply” button to use this rule “as-is” and have it apply to all incoming URLs to our site.  Because my www.scottgu.com site uses ASP.NET Web Forms, I’m going to make one small change to the rule we generated above – which is to add a condition that will ensure that URLs to ASP.NET’s built-in “WebResource.axd” handler are excluded from our case-sensitivity URL Rewrite logic.  URLs to the WebResource.axd handler will only come from server-controls emitted from my pages – and will never be linked to from external sites.  While my site will continue to function fine if we redirect these URLs to automatically be lower-case – doing so isn’t necessary and will add an extra HTTP redirect to many of my pages.  The good news is that adding a condition that prevents my URL Rewriting rule from happening with certain URLs is easy.  We simply need to expand the “Conditions” section of the form above We can then click the “Add” button to add a condition clause.  This will bring up the “Add Condition” dialog: Above I’ve entered {URL} as the Condition input – and said that this rule should only execute if the URL does not match a regex pattern which contains the string “WebResource.axd”.  This will ensure that WebResource.axd URLs to my site will be allowed to execute just fine without having the URL be re-written to be all lower-case. Note: If you have static resources (like references to .jpg, .css, and .js files) within your site that currently use upper-case characters you’ll probably want to add additional condition filter clauses so that URLs to them also don’t get redirected to be lower-case (just add rules for patterns like .jpg, .gif, .js, etc).  Your site will continue to work fine if these URLs get redirected to be lower case (meaning the site won’t break) – but it will cause an extra HTTP redirect to happen on your site for URLs that don’t need to be redirected for SEO reasons.  So setting up a condition clause makes sense to add. When I click the “ok” button above and apply our lower-case rewriting rule the admin tool will save the following additional rule to our web.config file: <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Lower Case URLs" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="[A-Z]" ignoreCase="false" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{ToLower:{URL}}" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://scottgu.com/Albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx Notice that the first URL (which has a capital “A”) automatically does a redirect to a lower-case version of the URL.  Scenario 3: Trailing Slashes Another common SEO problem I discussed earlier in this post is the scenario of trailing slashes within URLs.  The trailing slash creates yet another situation that causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and so split search rankings: http://scottgu.com http://scottgu.com/ We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the first URL (that does not have a trailing slash) to instead go to the second one that does.  Like before, we will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve.  To create such a rule we’ll click the “Add Rule” link in the URL Rewrite admin tool again.  This will cause the “Add Rule” dialog to appear again: The URL Rewrite admin tool has a built-in “Append or remove the trailing slash symbol” rule template.  When we select it and click the “ok” button we’ll see the following dialog which asks us if we want to create a rule that automatically redirects users to a URL with a trailing slash if one isn’t present: Like within our previous lower-casing rewrite rule we’ll add one additional condition clause that will exclude WebResource.axd URLs from being processed by this rule.  This will avoid an unnecessary redirect for happening for those URLs. When we click the “OK” button we’ll get a pre-written rule that automatically performs a permanent redirect if the URL doesn’t have a trailing slash – and if the URL is not processed by either a directory or a file.  This will save the following additional rule to our web.config file: <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Lower Case URLs" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="[A-Z]" ignoreCase="false" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{ToLower:{URL}}" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Trailing Slash" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*[^/])$" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsDirectory" negate="true" />                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsFile" negate="true" />                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://scottgu.com http://scottgu.com/ Notice that the first URL (which has no trailing slash) automatically does a redirect to a URL with the trailing slash.  Because it is a permanent redirect, search engines will follow the URL and update the page ranking. Scenario 4: Canonical Host Names The final SEO problem I discussed earlier are scenarios where a site works with both a leading “www” hostname prefix as well as just the hostname itself.  This causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and split search rankling: http://www.scottgu.com/albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the first URL (that has a www prefix) to instead go to the second URL.  Like before, we will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve.  To create such a rule we’ll click the “Add Rule” link in the URL Rewrite admin tool again.  This will cause the “Add Rule” dialog to appear again: The URL Rewrite admin tool has a built-in “Canonical domain name” rule template.  When we select it and click the “ok” button we’ll see the following dialog which asks us if we want to create a redirect rule that automatically redirects users to a primary host name URL: Above I’m entering the primary URL address I want to expose to the web: scottgu.com.  When we click the “OK” button we’ll get a pre-written rule that automatically performs a permanent redirect if the URL has another leading domain name prefix.  This will save the following additional rule to our web.config file: <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Cannonical Hostname">                     <match url="(.*)" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^scottgu\.com$" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="http://scottgu.com/{R:1}" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Lower Case URLs" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="[A-Z]" ignoreCase="false" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{ToLower:{URL}}" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Trailing Slash" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*[^/])$" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsDirectory" negate="true" />                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsFile" negate="true" />                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://www.scottgu.com/albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx Notice that the first URL (which has the “www” prefix) now automatically does a redirect to the second URL which does not have the www prefix.  Because it is a permanent redirect, search engines will follow the URL and update the page ranking. 4 Simple Rules for Improved SEO The above 4 rules are pretty easy to setup and should take less than 15 minutes to configure on existing sites you already have.  The beauty of using a solution like the URL Rewrite Extension is that you can take advantage of it without having to change code within your web-site – and without having to break any existing links already pointing at your site.  Users who follow existing links will be automatically redirected to the new URLs you wish to publish.  And search engines will start to give your site a higher search relevancy ranking – which will list your site higher in search results and drive more traffic to it. Customizing your URL Rewriting rules further is easy to-do either by editing the web.config file directly, or alternatively, just double click the URL Rewrite icon within the IIS 7.x admin tool and it will list all the active rules for your web-site or application: Clicking any of the rules above will open the rules editor back up and allow you to tweak/customize/save them further. Summary Measuring and improving SEO is something every developer building a public-facing web-site needs to think about and focus on.  If you haven’t already, download and use the SEO Toolkit to analyze the SEO of your sites today. New URL Routing features in ASP.NET MVC and ASP.NET Web Forms 4 make it much easier to build applications that have more control over the URLs that are published.  Tools like the URL Rewrite Extension that I’ve talked about in this blog post make it much easier to improve the URLs that are published from sites you already have built today – without requiring you to change a lot of code. The URL Rewrite Extension provides a bunch of additional great capabilities – far beyond just SEO - as well.  I’ll be covering these additional capabilities more in future blog posts. Hope this helps, Scott

    Read the article

  • View Maps and Get Directions in Google Chrome

    - by Asian Angel
    Every so often we all need to look at a map for reference purposes or to get directions. If you are looking for a great quick reference app then join us as we look at the Mini Google Maps extension for Google Chrome. Mini Google Maps in Action While this may look like a rather basic map extension there is more to it than meets the eye at first glance. Here is the default view when you open Mini Google Maps for the first time. Things that we really liked about this extension were: Three different aerial views available (Map, Satellite, & Terrain) Three different viewing sizes available (and the extension remembers your chosen size) The ability to get directions in combination with a map We decided to try each of the viewing sizes available…here you can see the “Medium Setting”. Notice that the scale stays the same but you get more territory included to view. Then the “Large Setting”…which we infinitely preferred to the others. Once again look at the amount of territory included by default…very nice. Switching over to the “Satellite View”… Followed by the “Terrain View”. For our first example we decided to peek at Vancouver, British Columbia. After zooming out a little bit we had a very nice looking map. For the next test we asked for directions from Vancouver to Toronto. Both the directions and map turned out very well. And just for fun we looked up Paris, France with the “Satellite View”. Conclusion If you find yourself needing to view a map or get directions often then the Mini Google Maps extension will be a very useful tool for you. Links Download the Mini Google Maps extension (Google Chrome Extensions) Similar Articles Productive Geek Tips Get Maps and Directions to Your Contacts in Outlook 2007Stupid Geek Tricks: Browse the Web from OutlookView the Time & Date in Chrome When Hiding Your TaskbarHow to Make Google Chrome Your Default BrowserAccess Google Chrome’s Special Pages the Easy Way TouchFreeze Alternative in AutoHotkey The Icy Undertow Desktop Windows Home Server – Backup to LAN The Clear & Clean Desktop Use This Bookmarklet to Easily Get Albums Use AutoHotkey to Assign a Hotkey to a Specific Window Latest Software Reviews Tinyhacker Random Tips Revo Uninstaller Pro Registry Mechanic 9 for Windows PC Tools Internet Security Suite 2010 PCmover Professional Make your Joomla & Drupal Sites Mobile with OSMOBI Integrate Twitter and Delicious and Make Life Easier Design Your Web Pages Using the Golden Ratio Worldwide Growth of the Internet How to Find Your Mac Address Use My TextTools to Edit and Organize Text

    Read the article

  • URL Rewrite – Multiple domains under one site. Part II

    - by OWScott
    I believe I have it … I’ve been meaning to put together the ultimate outgoing rule for hosting multiple domains under one site.  I finally sat down this week and setup a few test cases, and created one rule to rule them all.  In Part I of this two part series, I covered the incoming rule necessary to host a site in a subfolder of a website, while making it appear as if it’s in the root of the site.  Part II won’t work without applying Part I first, so if you haven’t read it, I encourage you to read it now. However, the incoming rule by itself doesn’t address everything.  Here’s the problem … Let’s say that we host www.site2.com in a subfolder called site2, off of masterdomain.com.  This is the same example I used in Part I.   Using an incoming rewrite rule, we are able to make a request to www.site2.com even though the site is really in the /site2 folder.  The gotcha comes with any type of path that ASP.NET generates (I’m sure other scripting technologies could do the same too).  ASP.NET thinks that the path to the root of the site is /site2, but the URL is /.  See the issue?  If ASP.NET generates a path or a redirect for us, it will always add /site2 to the URL.  That results in a path that looks something like www.site2.com/site2.  In Part I, I mentioned that you should add a condition where “{PATH_INFO} ‘does not match’ /site2”.  That allows www.site2.com/site2 and www.site2.com to both function the same.  This allows the site to always work, but if you want to hide /site2 in the URL, you need to take it one step further. One way to address this is in your code.  Ultimately this is the best bet.  Ruslan Yakushev has a great article on a few considerations that you can address in code.  I recommend giving that serious consideration.  Additionally, if you have upgraded to ASP.NET 3.5 SP1 or greater, it takes care of some of the references automatically for you. However, what if you inherit an existing application?  Or you can’t easily go through your existing site and make the code changes?  If this applies to you, read on. That’s where URL Rewrite 2.0 comes in.  With URL Rewrite 2.0, you can create an outgoing rule that will remove the /site2 before the page is sent back to the user.  This means that you can take an existing application, host it in a subfolder of your site, and ensure that the URL never reveals that it’s in a subfolder. Performance Considerations Performance overhead is something to be mindful of.  These outbound rules aren’t simply changing the server variables.  The first rule I’ll cover below needs to parse the HTML body and pull out the path (i.e. /site2) on the way through.  This will add overhead, possibly significant if you have large pages and a busy site.  In other words, your mileage may vary and you may need to test to see the impact that these rules have.  Don’t worry too much though.  For many sites, the performance impact is negligible. So, how do we do it? Creating the Outgoing Rule There are really two things to keep in mind.  First, ASP.NET applications frequently generate a URL that adds the /site2 back into the URL.  In addition to URLs, they can be in form elements, img elements and the like.  The goal is to find all of those situations and rewrite it on the way out.  Let’s call this the ‘URL problem’. Second, and similarly, ASP.NET can send a LOCATION redirect that causes a redirect back to another page.  Again, ASP.NET isn’t aware of the different URL and it will add the /site2 to the redirect.  Form Authentication is a good example on when this occurs.  Try to password protect a site running from a subfolder using forms auth and you’ll quickly find that the URL becomes www.site2.com/site2 again.  Let’s term this the ‘redirect problem’. Solving the URL Problem – Outgoing Rule #1 Let’s create a rule that removes the /site2 from any URL.  We want to remove it from relative URLs like /site2/something, or absolute URLs like http://www.site2.com/site2/something.  Most URLs that ASP.NET creates will be relative URLs, but I figure that there may be some applications that piece together a full URL, so we might as well expect that situation. Let’s get started.  First, create a new outbound rule.  You can create the rule within the /site2 folder which will reduce the performance impact of the rule.  Just a reminder that incoming rules for this situation won’t work in a subfolder … but outgoing rules will. Give it a name that makes sense to you, for example “Outgoing – URL paths”. Precondition.  If you place the rule in the subfolder, it will only run for that site and folder, so there isn’t need for a precondition.  Run it for all requests.  If you place it in the root of the site, you may want to create a precondition for HTTP_HOST = ^(www\.)?site2\.com$. For the Match section, there are a few things to consider.  For performance reasons, it’s best to match the least amount of elements that you need to accomplish the task.  For my test cases, I just needed to rewrite the <a /> tag, but you may need to rewrite any number of HTML elements.  Note that as long as you have the exclude /site2 rule in your incoming rule as I described in Part I, some elements that don’t show their URL—like your images—will work without removing the /site2 from them.  That reduces the processing needed for this rule. Leave the “matching scope” at “Response” and choose the elements that you want to change. Set the pattern to “^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)”.  Make sure to replace ‘site2’ with your subfolder name in both places.  Yes, I realize this is a pretty messy looking rule, but it handles a few situations.  This rule will handle the following situations correctly: Original Rewritten using {R:1}{R:2} http://www.site2.com/site2/default.aspx http://www.site2.com/default.aspx http://www.site2.com/folder1/site2/default.aspx Won’t rewrite since it’s a sub-sub folder /site2/default.aspx /default.aspx site2/default.aspx /default.aspx /folder1/site2/default.aspx Won’t rewrite since it’s a sub-sub folder. For the conditions section, you can leave that be. Finally, for the rule, set the Action Type to “Rewrite” and set the Value to “{R:1}{R:2}”.  The {R:1} and {R:2} are back references to the sections within parentheses.  In other words, in http://domain.com/site2/something, {R:1} will be http://domain.com and {R:2} will be /something. If you view your rule from your web.config file (or applicationHost.config if it’s a global rule), it should look like this: <rule name="Outgoing - URL paths" enabled="true"> <match filterByTags="A" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> Solving the Redirect Problem Outgoing Rule #2 The second issue that we can run into is with a client-side redirect.  This is triggered by a LOCATION response header that is sent to the client.  Forms authentication is a common example.  To reproduce this, password protect your subfolder and watch how it redirects and adds the subfolder path back in. Notice in my test case the extra paths: http://site2.com/site2/login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fsite2%2fdefault.aspx I want to remove /site2 from both the URL and the ReturnUrl querystring value.  For semi-readability, let’s do this in 2 separate rules, one for the URL and one for the querystring. Create a second rule.  As with the previous rule, it can be created in the /site2 subfolder.  In the URL Rewrite wizard, select Outbound rules –> “Blank Rule”. Fill in the following information: Name response_location URL Precondition Don’t set Match: Matching Scope Server Variable Match: Variable Name RESPONSE_LOCATION Match: Pattern ^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*) Conditions Don’t set Action Type Rewrite Action Properties {R:1}{R:2} It should end up like so: <rule name="response_location URL"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> Outgoing Rule #3 Outgoing Rule #2 only takes care of the URL path, and not the querystring path.  Let’s create one final rule to take care of the path in the querystring to ensure that ReturnUrl=%2fsite2%2fdefault.aspx gets rewritten to ReturnUrl=%2fdefault.aspx. The %2f is the HTML encoding for forward slash (/). Create a rule like the previous one, but with the following settings: Name response_location querystring Precondition Don’t set Match: Matching Scope Server Variable Match: Variable Name RESPONSE_LOCATION Match: Pattern (.*)%2fsite2(.*) Conditions Don’t set Action Type Rewrite Action Properties {R:1}{R:2} The config should look like this: <rule name="response_location querystring"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="(.*)%2fsite2(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> It’s possible to squeeze the last two rules into one, but it gets kind of confusing so I felt that it’s better to show it as two separate rules. Summary With the rules covered in these two parts, we’re able to have a site in a subfolder and make it appear as if it’s in the root of the site.  Not only that, we can overcome automatic redirecting that is caused by ASP.NET, other scripting technologies, and especially existing applications. Following is an example of the incoming and outgoing rules necessary for a site called www.site2.com hosted in a subfolder called /site2.  Remember that the outgoing rules can be placed in the /site2 folder instead of the in the root of the site. <rewrite> <rules> <rule name="site2.com in a subfolder" enabled="true" stopProcessing="true"> <match url=".*" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^(www\.)?site2\.com$" /> <add input="{PATH_INFO}" pattern="^/site2($|/)" negate="true" /> </conditions> <action type="Rewrite" url="/site2/{R:0}" /> </rule> </rules> <outboundRules> <rule name="Outgoing - URL paths" enabled="true"> <match filterByTags="A" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> <rule name="response_location URL"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> <rule name="response_location querystring"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="(.*)%2fsite2(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> </outboundRules> </rewrite> If you run into any situations that aren’t caught by these rules, please let me know so I can update this to be as complete as possible. Happy URL Rewriting!

    Read the article

  • Slides and Code from my Silverlight MVVM Talk at DevConnections

    - by dwahlin
    I had a great time at the DevConnections conference in Las Vegas this year where Visual Studio 2010 and Silverlight 4 were launched. While at the conference I had the opportunity to give a full-day Silverlight workshop as well as 4 different talks and met a lot of people developing applications in Silverlight. I also had a chance to appear on a live broadcast of Channel 9 with John Papa, Ward Bell and Shawn Wildermuth, record a video with Rick Strahl covering jQuery versus Silverlight and record a few podcasts on Silverlight and ASP.NET MVC 2.  It was a really busy 4 days but I had a lot of fun chatting with people and hearing about different business problems they were solving with ASP.NET and/or Silverlight. Thanks to everyone who attended my sessions and took the time to ask questions and stop by to talk one-on-one. One of the talks I gave covered the Model-View-ViewModel pattern and how it can be used to build architecturally sound applications. Topics covered in the talk included: Understanding the MVVM pattern Benefits of the MVVM pattern Creating a ViewModel class Implementing INotifyPropertyChanged in a ViewModelBase class Binding a ViewModel declaratively in XAML Binding a ViewModel with code ICommand and ButtonBase commanding support in Silverlight 4 Using InvokeCommandBehavior to handle additional commanding needs Working with ViewModels and Sample Data in Blend Messaging support with EventBus classes, EventAggregator and Messenger My personal take on code in a code-beside file (I’m all in favor of it when used appropriately for message boxes, child windows, animations, etc.) One of the samples I showed in the talk was intended to teach all of the concepts mentioned above while keeping things as simple as possible.  The sample demonstrates quite a few things you can do with Silverlight and the MVVM pattern so check it out and feel free to leave feedback about things you like, things you’d do differently or anything else. MVVM is simply a pattern, not a way of life so there are many different ways to implement it. If you’re new to the subject of MVVM check out the following resources. I wish this talk would’ve been recorded (especially since my live and canned demos all worked :-)) but these resources will help get you going quickly. Getting Started with the MVVM Pattern in Silverlight Applications Model-View-ViewModel (MVVM) Explained Laurent Bugnion’s Excellent Talk at MIX10     Download sample code and slides from my DevConnections talk     For more information about onsite, online and video training, mentoring and consulting solutions for .NET, SharePoint or Silverlight please visit http://www.thewahlingroup.com.

    Read the article

  • MKMapView memory usage grows out of control with setRegion: calls

    - by Kurt
    Hi, I have a single MKMapView instance that I have programmatically added to a UIView. As part of the UI, the user can cycle through a list of addresses and the map view is updated to show the correct map for each address as the user goes through them. I create the map view once, and simply change what it displays with setRegion:animated:. The problem is that each time the map is changed to show a new address, the memory usage of my program increases by 200K-500K (as reported by Memory Monitor in Instruments). According to Object Allocations, it appears that a lot of 1.0K Mallocs are happening each time, and the Extended Detail pane for these 1.0K allocations shows that the Responsible Caller is convert_image_data and the Extended Detail pane shows that this is the result of [MKMapTileView drawLayer:inContext:]. So, seems likely to me that the memory usage is due to MKMapView not freeing memory it uses to redraw the map each time. In fact, when I don't display the map at all (by not even adding it as a subview of my main UIView) but still cycle through the addresses (which changes various UILabels and other displayed info) the memory usage for the app does NOT increase. If I add the map view but never update it with setRegion:, the memory also does NOT increase when changing to a new address. One more bit of info: if I go to a new address (and therefore ask the map to display the new address) the memory jumps as described above. However, if I go back to an address that was already displayed, the memory does not jump when the map redraws with the old address. Also, this happens on iPad (real device) with 3.2 and on iPhone (again, real device) with 3.1.2. Here's how I initialize the MKMapView (I only do this once): CGRect mapFrame; mapFrame.origin.y = 460; // yes, magic numbers. just for testing. mapFrame.origin.x = 0; mapFrame.size.height = 500; mapFrame.size.width = 768; mapView = [[MKMapView alloc] initWithFrame:mapFrame]; mapView.delegate = self; [self.view insertSubview:mapView atIndex:0]; And in response to the user selecting an address, I set the map like so: MKCoordinateRegion region; MKCoordinateSpan span; span.latitudeDelta=kStreetMapSpan; // 0.003 span.longitudeDelta=kStreetMapSpan; // 0.003 region.center = address.coords; // coords is CLLocationCoordinate2D region.span = span; mapView.region.span = span; [mapView setRegion:region animated:NO]; Any thoughts? I've scoured the net but haven't seen mention of this problem, and I've reached the limits of my Instruments knowledge. Thanks for any ideas.

    Read the article

  • Should I implement BackBone.js into my ASP.NET WebForms applications?

    - by Walter Stabosz
    Background I'm trying to improve my group's current web app development pattern. Our current pattern is something we came up with while trying to rich web apps on top of ASP.NET WebForms (none of us knew ASP.NET MVC). This is the current pattern: ! Our application is using the WinForms Framework. Our ASPX pages are essentially just HTML, we use almost no WebControls. We use JavaScript/jQuery to perform all of our UI events and AJAX calls. For a single ASPX page, we have a single .js file. All of our AJAX calls are POSTs (not RESTful at all) Our AJAX calls contact WebMethods which we have defined in a series of ASMX files. One ASMX file per business object. Why Change? I want to revise our pattern a bit for a couple of reasons: We're starting to find that our JavaScript files are getting a bit unwieldy. We're using a hodgepodge of methods for keeping our local data and DOM updates in sync. We seem to spend too much time writing code to keep things in sync, and it can get tricky to debug. I've been reading Developing Backbone.js Applications and I like a lot of what Backbone has to offer in terms of code organization and separation of concerns. However, I've gotten to the chapter on RESTful app, I started to feel some hesitation about using Backbone. The Problem The problem is our WebMethods do not really fit into the RESTful pattern, which seems to be the way Backbone wants to consume them. For now, I'd only like to address our issue of disorganized client side code. I'd like to avoid major rewrites to our WebMethods. My Questions Is it possible to use Backbone (or a similar library) to clean up our client code, while not majorly impacting our data access WebMethods? Or would trying to use Backbone in this manner be a bastardization of it's intended use? Anyone have any suggestions for improving our pattern in the area of code organization and spending less time writing DOM and data sync code?

    Read the article

  • URL Rewrite – Protocol (http/https) in the Action

    - by OWScott
    IIS URL Rewrite supports server variables for pretty much every part of the URL and http header. However, there is one commonly used server variable that isn’t readily available.  That’s the protocol—HTTP or HTTPS. You can easily check if a page request uses HTTP or HTTPS, but that only works in the conditions part of the rule.  There isn’t a variable available to dynamically set the protocol in the action part of the rule.  What I wish is that there would be a variable like {HTTP_PROTOCOL} which would have a value of ‘HTTP’ or ‘HTTPS’.  There is a server variable called {HTTPS}, but the values of ‘on’ and ‘off’ aren’t practical in the action.  You can also use {SERVER_PORT} or {SERVER_PORT_SECURE}, but again, they aren’t useful in the action. Let me illustrate.  The following rule will redirect traffic for http(s)://localtest.me/ to http://www.localtest.me/. <rule name="Redirect to www"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="http://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> The problem is that it forces the request to HTTP even if the original request was for HTTPS. Interestingly enough, I planned to blog about this topic this week when I noticed in my twitter feed yesterday that Jeff Graves, a former colleague of mine, just wrote an excellent blog post about this very topic.  He beat me to the punch by just a couple days.  However, I figured I would still write my blog post on this topic.  While his solution is a excellent one, I personally handle this another way most of the time.  Plus, it’s a commonly asked question that isn’t documented well enough on the web yet, so having another article on the web won’t hurt. I can think of four different ways to handle this, and depending on your situation you may lean towards any of the four.  Don’t let the choices overwhelm you though.  Let’s keep it simple, Option 1 is what I use most of the time, Option 2 is what Jeff proposed and is the safest option, and Option 3 and Option 4 need only be considered if you have a more unique situation.  All four options will work for most situations. Option 1 – CACHE_URL, single rule There is a server variable that has the protocol in it; {CACHE_URL}.  This server variable contains the entire URL string (e.g. http://www.localtest.me:80/info.aspx?id=5)  All we need to do is extract the HTTP or HTTPS and we’ll be set. This tends to be my preferred way to handle this situation. Indeed, Jeff did briefly mention this in his blog post: … you could use a condition on the CACHE_URL variable and a back reference in the rewritten URL. The problem there is that you then need to match all of the conditions which could be a problem if your rule depends on a logical “or” match for conditions. Thus the problem.  If you have multiple conditions set to “Match Any” rather than “Match All” then this option won’t work.  However, I find that 95% of all rules that I write use “Match All” and therefore, being the lazy administrator that I am I like this simple solution that only requires adding a single condition to a rule.  The caveat is that if you use “Match Any” then you must consider one of the next two options. Enough with the preamble.  Here’s how it works.  Add a condition that checks for {CACHE_URL} with a pattern of “^(.+)://” like so: How you have a back-reference to the part before the ://, which is our treasured HTTP or HTTPS.  In URL Rewrite 2.0 or greater you can check the “Track capture groups across conditions”, make that condition the first condition, and you have yourself a back-reference of {C:1}. The “Redirect to www” example with support for maintaining the protocol, will become: <rule name="Redirect to www" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions trackAllCaptures="true"> <add input="{CACHE_URL}" pattern="^(.+)://" /> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="{C:1}://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> It’s not as easy as it would be if Microsoft gave us a built-in {HTTP_PROTOCOL} variable, but it’s pretty close. I also like this option since I often create rule examples for other people and this type of rule is portable since it’s self-contained within a single rule. Option 2 – Using a Rewrite Map For a safer rule that works for both “Match Any” and “Match All” situations, you can use the Rewrite Map solution that Jeff proposed.  It’s a perfectly good solution with the only drawback being the ever so slight extra effort to set it up since you need to create a rewrite map before you create the rule.  In other words, if you choose to use this as your sole method of handling the protocol, you’ll be safe. After you create a Rewrite Map called MapProtocol, you can use “{MapProtocol:{HTTPS}}” for the protocol within any rule action.  Following is an example using a Rewrite Map. <rewrite> <rules> <rule name="Redirect to www" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="{MapProtocol:{HTTPS}}://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> </rules> <rewriteMaps> <rewriteMap name="MapProtocol"> <add key="on" value="https" /> <add key="off" value="http" /> </rewriteMap> </rewriteMaps> </rewrite> Option 3 – CACHE_URL, Multi-rule If you have many rules that will use the protocol, you can create your own server variable which can be used in subsequent rules. This option is no easier to set up than Option 2 above, but you can use it if you prefer the easier to remember syntax of {HTTP_PROTOCOL} vs. {MapProtocol:{HTTPS}}. The potential issue with this rule is that if you don’t have access to the server level (e.g. in a shared environment) then you cannot set server variables without permission. First, create a rule and place it at the top of the set of rules.  You can create this at the server, site or subfolder level.  However, if you create it at the site or subfolder level then the HTTP_PROTOCOL server variable needs to be approved at the server level.  This can be achieved in IIS Manager by navigating to URL Rewrite at the server level, clicking on “View Server Variables” from the Actions pane, and added HTTP_PROTOCOL. If you create the rule at the server level then this step is not necessary.  Following is an example of the first rule to create the HTTP_PROTOCOL and then a rule that uses it.  The Create HTTP_PROTOCOL rule only needs to be created once on the server. <rule name="Create HTTP_PROTOCOL"> <match url=".*" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{CACHE_URL}" pattern="^(.+)://" /> </conditions> <serverVariables> <set name="HTTP_PROTOCOL" value="{C:1}" /> </serverVariables> <action type="None" /> </rule>   <rule name="Redirect to www" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="{HTTP_PROTOCOL}://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> Option 4 – Multi-rule Just to be complete I’ll include an example of how to achieve the same thing with multiple rules. I don’t see any reason to use it over the previous examples, but I’ll include an example anyway.  Note that it will only work with the “Match All” setting for the conditions. <rule name="Redirect to www - http" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> <add input="{HTTPS}" pattern="off" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="http://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> <rule name="Redirect to www - https" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> <add input="{HTTPS}" pattern="on" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="https://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> Conclusion Above are four working examples of methods to call the protocol (HTTP or HTTPS) from the action of a URL Rewrite rule.  You can use whichever method you most prefer.  I’ve listed them in the order that I favor them, although I could see some people preferring Option 2 as their first choice.  In any of the cases, hopefully you can use this as a reference for when you need to use the protocol in the rule’s action when writing your URL Rewrite rules. Further information: Viewing all Server Variable for a site. URL Parts available to URL Rewrite Rules Further URL Rewrite articles

    Read the article

  • Find the occurrence of word/character in SQL column with wildcard character - PATINDEX

    - by Vipin
    CharIndex and PatIndex both can be used to determine the presence of character or string within sql column data. Both returns the starting position of the first occurrence of the character/word within expression. However, one major difference between CharIndex and PatIndex is that later allows the use of wild card characters while searching for character or word within column data. Also, Patindex is useful for searching within Text datatype. Allowed wild card characters are % and _ . " % "  - use it for any number of characters " _ "  - use it for a single character. Syntax PATINDEX('%pattern%', string_expression) Note - it's mandatory to include pattern within %% characters. returns starting position of occurrence of pattern, if found. returns 0, if not found returns NULL , if either pattern or string_expression is null. Example SELECT fldname FROM tblUsers WHERE PatIndex('%v_pin%', fldname) > 0

    Read the article

  • How to avoid big and clumpsy UITableViewController on iOS?

    - by Johan Karlsson
    I have a problem when implementing the MVC-pattern on iOS. I have searched the Internet but seems not to find any nice solution to this problem. Many UITableViewController implementations seems to be rather big. Most example I have seen lets the UITableViewController implement UITableViewDelegate and UITableViewDataSource. These implementations are a big reason why UITableViewControlleris getting big. One solution would be to create separate classes that implements UITableViewDelegate and UITableViewDataSource. Of course these classes would have to have a reference to the UITableViewController. Are there any drawbacks using this solution? In general I think you should delegate the functionality to other "Helper" classes or similar, using the delegate pattern. Are there any well established ways of solving this problem? I do not want the model to contain to much functionality, nor the view. A believe that the logic should really be in the controller class, since this is one of the cornerstones of the MVC-pattern. But the big question is; How should you divide the controller of a MVC-implementation into smaller manageable pieces? (Applies to MVC in iOS in this case) There might be a general pattern for solving this, although I am specifically looking for a solution for iOS. Please give an example of a good pattern for solving this issue. Also an argument why this solution is awesome.

    Read the article

  • Segmentation fault 11 in MacOS X- C++ [migrated]

    - by Marcos Cesar Vargas Magana
    all. I have a "segmentation fault 11" error when I run the following code. The code actually compiles but I get the error at run time. //** Terror.h ** #include <iostream> #include <string> #include <map> using std::map; using std::pair; using std::string; template<typename Tsize> class Terror { public: //Inserts a message in the map. static Tsize insertMessage(const string& message) { mErrorMessages.insert( pair<Tsize, string>(mErrorMessages.size()+1, message) ); return mErrorMessages.size(); } private: static map<Tsize, string> mErrorMessages; } template<typename Tsize> map<Tsize,string> Terror<Tsize>::mErrorMessages; //** error.h ** #include <iostream> #include "Terror.h" typedef unsigned short errorType; typedef Terror<errorType> error; errorType memoryAllocationError=error::insertMessage("ERROR: out of memory."); //** main.cpp ** #include <iostream> #include "error.h" using namespace std; int main() { try { throw error(memoryAllocationError); } catch(error& err) { } } I have kind of debugging the code and the error happens when the message is being inserted in the static map member. An observation is that if I put the line: errorType memoryAllocationError=error::insertMessage("ERROR: out of memory."); inside the "main()" function instead of at global scope, then everything works fine. But I would like to extend the error messages at global scope, not at local scope. The map is defined static so that all instances of "error" share the same error codes and messages. Do you know how can I get this or something similar. Thank you very much.

    Read the article

  • How to avoid big and clumsy UITableViewController on iOS?

    - by Johan Karlsson
    I have a problem when implementing the MVC-pattern on iOS. I have searched the Internet but seems not to find any nice solution to this problem. Many UITableViewController implementations seems to be rather big. Most examples I have seen lets the UITableViewController implement <UITableViewDelegate> and <UITableViewDataSource>. These implementations are a big reason why UITableViewControlleris getting big. One solution would be to create separate classes that implements <UITableViewDelegate> and <UITableViewDataSource>. Of course these classes would have to have a reference to the UITableViewController. Are there any drawbacks using this solution? In general I think you should delegate the functionality to other "Helper" classes or similar, using the delegate pattern. Are there any well established ways of solving this problem? I do not want the model to contain too much functionality, nor the view. I believe that the logic should really be in the controller class, since this is one of the cornerstones of the MVC-pattern. But the big question is: How should you divide the controller of a MVC-implementation into smaller manageable pieces? (Applies to MVC in iOS in this case) There might be a general pattern for solving this, although I am specifically looking for a solution for iOS. Please give an example of a good pattern for solving this issue. Please provide an argument why your solution is awesome.

    Read the article

  • Design Patterns - Why the need for interfaces?

    - by Kyle Johnson
    OK. I am learning design patterns. Every time I see someone code an example of a design pattern they use interfaces. Here is an example: http://visualstudiomagazine.com/Articles/2013/06/18/the-facade-pattern-in-net.aspx?Page=1 Can someone explain to me why was the interfaces needed in this example to demonstrate the facade pattern? The program work if you pass in the classes to the facade instead of the interface. If I don't have interfaces does that mean

    Read the article

  • Rails Google Maps integration Javascript problem

    - by JZ
    I'm working on Rails 3.0.0.beta2, following Advanced Rails Recipes "Recipe #32, Mark locations on a Google Map" and I hit a road block: I do not see a google map. My @adds view uses @adds.to_json to connect the google maps api with my model. My database contains "latitude" "longitude", as floating points. And the entire project can be accessed at github. Can you see where I'm not connecting the to_json output with the javascript correctly? Can you see other glairing errors in my javascript? Thanks in advance! My application.js file: function initialize() { if (GBrowserIsCompatible() && typeof adds != 'undefined') { var map = new GMap2(document.getElementById("map")); map.setCenter(new GLatLng(37.4419, -122.1419), 13); map.addControl(new GLargeMapControl()); function createMarker(latlng, add) { var marker = new GMarker(latlng); var html="<strong>"+add.first_name+"</strong><br />"+add.address; GEvent.addListener(marker,"click", function() { map.openInfoWindowHtml(latlng, html); }); return marker; } var bounds = new GLatLngBounds; for (var i = 0; i < adds.length; i++) { var latlng=new GLatLng(adds[i].latitude,adds[i].longitude) bounds.extend(latlng); map.addOverlay(createMarker(latlng, adds[i])); } map.setCenter(bounds.getCenter(),map.getBoundsZoomLevel(bounds)); } } window.onload=initialize; window.onunload=GUnload; Layouts/adds.html.erb: <script src="http://maps.google.com/maps?file=api&amp;v=2&amp;sensor=true_or_false&amp;key=ABQIAAAAeH4ThRuftWNHlwYdvcK1QBTJQa0g3IQ9GZqIMmInSLzwtGDKaBQvZChl_y5OHf0juslJRNx7TbxK3Q" type="text/javascript"></script> <% if @adds -%> <script type="text/javascript"> var maps = <%= @adds.to_json %>; </script> <% end -%>

    Read the article

  • WIF-less claim extraction from ACS: SWT

    - by Elton Stoneman
    WIF with SAML is solid and flexible, but unless you need the power, it can be overkill for simple claim assertion, and in the REST world WIF doesn’t have support for the latest token formats.  Simple Web Token (SWT) may not be around forever, but while it's here it's a nice easy format which you can manipulate in .NET without having to go down the WIF route. Assuming you have set up a Relying Party in ACS, specifying SWT as the token format: When ACS redirects to your login page, it will POST the SWT in the first form variable. It comes through in the BinarySecurityToken element of a RequestSecurityTokenResponse XML payload , the SWT type is specified with a TokenType of http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2009/11/swt-token-profile-1.0 : <t:RequestSecurityTokenResponse xmlns:t="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/02/trust">   <t:Lifetime>     <wsu:Created xmlns:wsu="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-utility-1.0.xsd">2012-08-31T07:31:18.655Z</wsu:Created>     <wsu:Expires xmlns:wsu="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-utility-1.0.xsd">2012-08-31T09:11:18.655Z</wsu:Expires>   </t:Lifetime>   <wsp:AppliesTo xmlns:wsp="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2004/09/policy">     <EndpointReference xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing">       <Address>http://localhost/x.y.z</Address>     </EndpointReference>   </wsp:AppliesTo>   <t:RequestedSecurityToken>     <wsse:BinarySecurityToken wsu:Id="uuid:fc8d3332-d501-4bb0-84ba-d31aa95a1a6c" ValueType="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2009/11/swt-token-profile-1.0" EncodingType="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-soap-message-security-1.0#Base64Binary" xmlns:wsu="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-utility-1.0.xsd" xmlns:wsse="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-secext-1.0.xsd"> [ base64string ] </wsse:BinarySecurityToken>   </t:RequestedSecurityToken>   <t:TokenType>http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2009/11/swt-token-profile-1.0</t:TokenType>   <t:RequestType>http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/02/trust/Issue</t:RequestType>   <t:KeyType>http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/05/identity/NoProofKey</t:KeyType> </t:RequestSecurityTokenResponse> Reading the SWT is as simple as base-64 decoding, then URL-decoding the element value:     var wrappedToken = XDocument.Parse(HttpContext.Current.Request.Form[1]);     var binaryToken = wrappedToken.Root.Descendants("{http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-secext-1.0.xsd}BinarySecurityToken").First();     var tokenBytes = Convert.FromBase64String(binaryToken.Value);     var token = Encoding.UTF8.GetString(tokenBytes);     var tokenType = wrappedToken.Root.Descendants("{http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/02/trust}TokenType").First().Value; The decoded token contains the claims as key/value pairs, along with the issuer, audience (ACS realm), expiry date and an HMAC hash, which are in query string format. Separate them on the ampersand, and you can write out the claim values in your logged-in page:     var decoded = HttpUtility.UrlDecode(token);     foreach (var part in decoded.Split('&'))     {         Response.Write("<pre>" + part + "</pre><br/>");     } - which will produce something like this: http://schemas.microsoft.com/ws/2008/06/identity/claims/authenticationinstant=2012-08-31T06:57:01.855Z http://schemas.microsoft.com/ws/2008/06/identity/claims/authenticationmethod=http://schemas.microsoft.com/ws/2008/06/identity/authenticationmethod/windows http://schemas.microsoft.com/ws/2008/06/identity/claims/windowsaccountname=XYZ http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/05/identity/claims/[email protected] http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/05/identity/claims/[email protected] http://schemas.microsoft.com/accesscontrolservice/2010/07/claims/identityprovider=http://fs.svc.xyz.com/adfs/services/trust Audience=http://localhost/x.y.z ExpiresOn=1346402225 Issuer=https://x-y-z.accesscontrol.windows.net/ HMACSHA256=oDCeEDDAWEC8x+yBnTaCLnzp4L6jI0Z/xNK95PdZTts= The HMAC hash lets you validate the token to ensure it hasn’t been tampered with. You'll need the token signing key from ACS, then you can re-sign the token and compare hashes. There's a full implementation of an SWT parser and validator here: How To Request SWT Token From ACS And How To Validate It At The REST WCF Service Hosted In Windows Azure, and a cut-down claim inspector on my github code gallery: ACS Claim Inspector. Interestingly, ACS lets you have a value for your logged-in page which has no relation to the realm for authentication, so you can put this code into a generic claim inspector page, and set that to be your logged-in page for any relying party where you want to check what's being sent through. Particularly handy with ADFS, when you're modifying the claims provided, and want to quickly see the results.

    Read the article

  • Multiple infowindows - tearing my hair out

    - by thewinchester
    Ok, I'll admit I'm nowhere near the best programmer on the planet - and I'm used to the answer staring me right in the face but not making sense of it. Problem I need to display multiple markers on a map, each with their own infowindow. I have created the individual markers without a problem, but don't know how to create the infowindows for each. Steps so far I am generating a map using the V3 API within an ASP-based website, with markers being created from a set of DB records. The markers are created by looping through a rs and defining a marker() with the relevant variables: var myLatlng = new google.maps.LatLng(lat,long); var marker = new google.maps.Marker({ map: map, position: myLatlng, title: 'locationname', icon: 'http://google-maps-icons.googlecode.com/files/park.png' }); This is creating all the relevant markers in their correct locations. What I need to do now, and am not sure of how to achieve is give each of them their own unique infowindow which I can use to display information and links relevant to that marker. Source <script type="text/javascript" src="http://maps.google.com/maps/api/js?sensor=false"></script> <script language="javascript"> $(document).ready(function() { //Google Maps var myOptions = { zoom: 5, center: new google.maps.LatLng(-26.66, 122.25), mapTypeControl: false, mapTypeId: google.maps.MapTypeId.ROADMAP, navigationControl: true, navigationControlOptions: { style: google.maps.NavigationControlStyle.SMALL } } var map = new google.maps.Map(document.getElementById("map_canvas"), myOptions); <!-- While locations_haslatlong not BOF.EOF --> <% While ((Repeat1__numRows <> 0) AND (NOT locations_haslatlong.EOF)) %> var myLatlng = new google.maps.LatLng(<%=(locations_haslatlong.Fields.Item("llat").Value)%>,<%=(locations_haslatlong.Fields.Item("llong").Value)%>); var marker = new google.maps.Marker({ map: map, position: myLatlng, title: '<%=(locations_haslatlong.Fields.Item("ldescription").Value)%>', icon: 'http://google-maps-icons.googlecode.com/files/park.png', clickable: true, }); <% Repeat1__index=Repeat1__index+1 Repeat1__numRows=Repeat1__numRows-1 locations_haslatlong.MoveNext() Wend %> <!-- End While locations_haslatlong not BOF.EOF --> google.maps.event.addListener(marker, 'click', function() { infowindow.open(map,marker); }); google.maps.event.addListener(marker, 'dblclick', function() { map.setZoom(14); }); });

    Read the article

  • Game AI: Pattern for implementing Sense-Think-Act components?

    - by Rosarch
    I'm developing a game. Each entity in the game is a GameObject. Each GameObject is composed of a GameObjectController, GameObjectModel, and GameObjectView. (Or inheritants thereof.) For NPCs, the GameObjectController is split into: IThinkNPC: reads current state and makes a decision about what to do IActNPC: updates state based on what needs to be done ISenseNPC: reads current state to answer world queries (eg "am I being in the shadows?") My question: Is this ok for the ISenseNPC interface? public interface ISenseNPC { // ... /// <summary> /// True if `dest` is a safe point to which to retreat. /// </summary> /// <param name="dest"></param> /// <param name="angleToThreat"></param> /// <param name="range"></param> /// <returns></returns> bool IsSafeToRetreat(Vector2 dest, float angleToThreat, float range); /// <summary> /// Finds a new location to which to retreat. /// </summary> /// <param name="angleToThreat"></param> /// <returns></returns> Vector2 newRetreatDest(float angleToThreat); /// <summary> /// Returns the closest LightSource that illuminates the NPC. /// Null if the NPC is not illuminated. /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> ILightSource ClosestIlluminatingLight(); /// <summary> /// True if the NPC is sufficiently far away from target. /// Assumes that target is the only entity it could ever run from. /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> bool IsSafeFromTarget(); } None of the methods take any parameters. Instead, the implementation is expected to maintain a reference to the relevant GameObjectController and read that. However, I'm now trying to write unit tests for this. Obviously, it's necessary to use mocking, since I can't pass arguments directly. The way I'm doing it feels really brittle - what if another implementation comes along that uses the world query utilities in a different way? Really, I'm not testing the interface, I'm testing the implementation. Poor. The reason I used this pattern in the first place was to keep IThinkNPC implementation code clean: public BehaviorState RetreatTransition(BehaviorState currentBehavior) { if (sense.IsCollidingWithTarget()) { NPCUtils.TraceTransitionIfNeeded(ToString(), BehaviorState.ATTACK.ToString(), "is colliding with target"); return BehaviorState.ATTACK; } if (sense.IsSafeFromTarget() && sense.ClosestIlluminatingLight() == null) { return BehaviorState.WANDER; } if (sense.ClosestIlluminatingLight() != null && sense.SeesTarget()) { NPCUtils.TraceTransitionIfNeeded(ToString(), BehaviorState.ATTACK.ToString(), "collides with target"); return BehaviorState.CHASE; } return currentBehavior; } Perhaps the cleanliness isn't worth it, however. So, if ISenseNPC takes all the params it needs every time, I could make it static. Is there any problem with that?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148  | Next Page >