Search Results

Search found 22416 results on 897 pages for 'url validation'.

Page 3/897 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • MVC: On partial page start validation from JS without postback

    - by dwilliams459
    How do I start validation from the client/javascript using the MS MVC Validation library? Using MS ASP.Net MVC, I have a page with a PartialView in a modal dialog (change password). When the user selects 'save', I need to validate this on the client side without a full page postback. I am able in JS to post and refresh the partialView, however I am unable to start client validation. The MS MVC validation starts on postback (Input type='submit'). How can I start this in JS? Validation on the full page with postback works. Thanks, d

    Read the article

  • Drupal FAPI: Add form elements on nodeform after validation

    - by ManuelBS
    Hi, I use Drupal 6.x. In my own module I alter each node form an add my own validation handler to it using $form['#validate'][] = 'my_own_validation_function'; Then I have the function function my_own_validation_function($form, &$form_state) { //if validation fails, i would like to rebuild the form to add additional form elements in hook_form_alter $form_state['rebuild'] = True; } My problem ist, that the validation functions does not respect my 'rebuild' = True becaus the form is never processed by hook_form_alter after validation. But I need hook_form_alter to add my additional form element. Is there a solution for my problem? Or are form_state changes in an own validation handler not respected even if I set &$form_state as a "pointer"? Thanks and cheers.

    Read the article

  • JQuery Validation Plugin: Prevent validation issue on nested form

    - by Majid
    I have a form on which I use validation. This form has a section for photo upload. Initially this section contains six elements with the following code: <img class="photo_upload" src="image/app/photo_upload.jpg"> I have bound a function to the click event for the class of photo_upload. This function replaces the image with a minimal form with this code: Copy code <form onsubmit="startUploadImage();" target="control_target" enctype="multipart/form-data" method="post" action="index.php"> <input type="hidden" value="add_image" name="service"> <input type="hidden" value="1000000" name="MAX_FILE_SIZE"> <input type="file" size="10" name="photo" id="photo_file_upload"><br> <button onclick="javascript:cancel_photo_upload();return false;">Cancel</button> </form> So, essentially, after the image is clicked, I'd have a new form nested in my original, validated form. Now, when I use this new form and upload an image, I receive an error (repeated three times) saying: validator is undefined http://host.com/path/index.php Line 286 What is going on here? My guess is this Submit event bubbles up to the outer form As we have validation on that form, validation is triggered, Validation tries to find the form triggering it, Since we have not bound validation to the inner form it returns 'undefined' Now, is my assessment correct? Whether it is or not, how can I solve this issue?

    Read the article

  • New Validation Attributes in ASP.NET MVC 3 Future

    - by imran_ku07
         Introduction:             Validating user inputs is an very important step in collecting information from users because it helps you to prevent errors during processing data. Incomplete or improperly formatted user inputs will create lot of problems for your application. Fortunately, ASP.NET MVC 3 makes it very easy to validate most common input validations. ASP.NET MVC 3 includes Required, StringLength, Range, RegularExpression, Compare and Remote validation attributes for common input validation scenarios. These validation attributes validates most of your user inputs but still validation for Email, File Extension, Credit Card, URL, etc are missing. Fortunately, some of these validation attributes are available in ASP.NET MVC 3 Future. In this article, I will show you how to leverage Email, Url, CreditCard and FileExtensions validation attributes(which are available in ASP.NET MVC 3 Future) in ASP.NET MVC 3 application.       Description:             First of all you need to download ASP.NET MVC 3 RTM Source Code from here. Then extract all files in a folder. Then open MvcFutures project from mvc3-rtm-sources\mvc3\src\MvcFutures folder. Build the project. In case, if you get compile time error(s) then simply remove the reference of System.Web.WebPages and System.Web.Mvc assemblies and add the reference of System.Web.WebPages and System.Web.Mvc 3 assemblies again but from the .NET tab and then build the project again, it will create a Microsoft.Web.Mvc assembly inside mvc3-rtm-sources\mvc3\src\MvcFutures\obj\Debug folder. Now we can use Microsoft.Web.Mvc assembly inside our application.             Create a new ASP.NET MVC 3 application. For demonstration purpose, I will create a dummy model UserInformation. So create a new class file UserInformation.cs inside Model folder and add the following code,   public class UserInformation { [Required] public string Name { get; set; } [Required] [EmailAddress] public string Email { get; set; } [Required] [Url] public string Website { get; set; } [Required] [CreditCard] public string CreditCard { get; set; } [Required] [FileExtensions(Extensions = "jpg,jpeg")] public string Image { get; set; } }             Inside UserInformation class, I am using Email, Url, CreditCard and FileExtensions validation attributes which are defined in Microsoft.Web.Mvc assembly. By default FileExtensionsAttribute allows png, jpg, jpeg and gif extensions. You can override this by using Extensions property of FileExtensionsAttribute class.             Then just open(or create) HomeController.cs file and add the following code,   public class HomeController : Controller { public ActionResult Index() { return View(); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult Index(UserInformation u) { return View(); } }             Next just open(or create) Index view for Home controller and add the following code,  @model NewValidationAttributesinASPNETMVC3Future.Model.UserInformation @{ ViewBag.Title = "Index"; Layout = "~/Views/Shared/_Layout.cshtml"; } <h2>Index</h2> <script src="@Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery.validate.min.js")" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="@Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery.validate.unobtrusive.min.js")" type="text/javascript"></script> @using (Html.BeginForm()) { @Html.ValidationSummary(true) <fieldset> <legend>UserInformation</legend> <div class="editor-label"> @Html.LabelFor(model => model.Name) </div> <div class="editor-field"> @Html.EditorFor(model => model.Name) @Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Name) </div> <div class="editor-label"> @Html.LabelFor(model => model.Email) </div> <div class="editor-field"> @Html.EditorFor(model => model.Email) @Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Email) </div> <div class="editor-label"> @Html.LabelFor(model => model.Website) </div> <div class="editor-field"> @Html.EditorFor(model => model.Website) @Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Website) </div> <div class="editor-label"> @Html.LabelFor(model => model.CreditCard) </div> <div class="editor-field"> @Html.EditorFor(model => model.CreditCard) @Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.CreditCard) </div> <div class="editor-label"> @Html.LabelFor(model => model.Image) </div> <div class="editor-field"> @Html.EditorFor(model => model.Image) @Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Image) </div> <p> <input type="submit" value="Save" /> </p> </fieldset> } <div> @Html.ActionLink("Back to List", "Index") </div>             Now just run your application. You will find that both client side and server side validation for the above validation attributes works smoothly.                      Summary:             Email, URL, Credit Card and File Extension input validations are very common. In this article, I showed you how you can validate these input validations into your application. I explained this with an example. I am also attaching a sample application which also includes Microsoft.Web.Mvc.dll. So you can add a reference of Microsoft.Web.Mvc assembly directly instead of doing any manual work. Hope you will enjoy this article too.   SyntaxHighlighter.all()

    Read the article

  • What is the best URL strategy to handle multiple search parameters and operators?

    - by Jon Winstanley
    Searching with mutltiple Parameters In my app I would like to allow the user to do complex searches based on several parameters, using a simple syntax similar to the GMail functionality when a user can search for "in:inbox is:unread" etc. However, GMail does a POST with this information and I would like the form to be a GET so that the information is in the URL of the search results page. Therefore I need the parameters to be formatted in the URL. Requirements: Keep the URL as clean as possible Avoid the use of invalid URL chars such as square brackets Allow lots of search functionality Have the ability to add more functions later. I know StackOverflow allows the user to search by multiple tags in this way: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/c+sql However, I'd like to also allow users to search with multiple additional parameters. Initial Design My design is currently to do use URLs such as these: http://example.com/search/tagged/c+sql/searchterm/transactions http://example.com/search/searchterm/transactions http://example.com/search/tagged/c+sql http://example.com/search/tagged/c+sql/not-tagged/java http://example.com/search/tagged/c+sql/created/yesterday http://example.com/search/created_by/user1234 I intend to parse the URL after the search parameter, then decide how to construct my search query. Has anyone seen URL parameters like this implemented well on a website? If so, which do it best?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 3 Client-Side Validation Summary with jQuery Validation (Unobtrusive JavaScript)

    - by Soe Tun
    When we were working with ASP.NET MVC 2, we needed to write our own JavaScript to get Client-Side Validation Summary with jQuery Validation plugin. I am one of those unfortunate people still stuck with .NET Framework Runtime 2.0 and .NET Framework 3.5; meaning I am still on ASP.NET MVC 2. So I will still keep on supporting by answering any question you may have with my original code.   Long awaited ASP.NET MVC 3 has been released, and it supports Client Side Validation Summary with jQuery out-of-the-box with new features like Unobtrusive JavaScript.   1. _Layout.cshtml Template Notice that I am using Protocol Relative URLs ( i.e., '//'.  Not 'http://' or 'https://' ) to reference script files and css files and you should use it too like that! However, please note that IE7 and IE8 will download the CSS files twice so use it with judgement. <!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <title>@ViewBag.Title</title> <link href="@Url.Content("~/Assets/Site.css")" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" /> <link href="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jqueryui/1.8.9/themes/redmond/jquery-ui.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" /> </head> <body> @RenderBody() <script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.4.4/jquery.min.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jqueryui/1.8.9/jquery-ui.min.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="//ajax.microsoft.com/ajax/jQuery.Validate/1.7/jQuery.Validate.min.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="//ajax.aspnetcdn.com/ajax/mvc/3.0/jquery.validate.unobtrusive.min.js" type="text/javascript"></script> </body> </html>   2. MVC View Template There are 3 things you *must* do exactly to get Client Side Validation Summary working. (1)  You must declare your Validation Summary **inside** the `Html.BeginForm()` block like below. (2)  You must pass `excludePropertyErrors: false` to the  Html.ValidationSummary()  method. @using (Html.BeginForm()) { @Html.ValidationSummary(false, "Please fix these errors."); <!-- The rest of your View Template --> }   (3)  You have to put the following two elements in the `<appSettings />` block of your Web.config file. <add key="ClientValidationEnabled" value="true"/> <add key="UnobtrusiveJavaScriptEnabled" value="true"/>   That is all you need to do.  Simple, right? I will upload a sample project for download soon.  Please let me know if you run into some issues.     P.S: Without getting into too much technical details, I just wanted to let you know what I went through to get this to work. I had to look into the ASP.NET MVC 3 RTM Source Code and the jquery.validate.unobtrusive.js source. Initially, I thought I have to hack the jquery.validate.unobtrusive.js or something to get this to work. But after digging into MVC3 RTM source, I found out how to do it.

    Read the article

  • Should a URL match the page's title?

    - by Yottatron
    Should the URL of a page match its title? For example: Http://example.com/about-cats.html <title>About Cats</title> Furthermore, if that title were to be changed by the page's author, should the URL change to match and the old URL be redirected (301) to the new URL? Edit Also, if the pages author were to decide to revert his changes after several days, would it be right to remove the redirect and set up an new redirect from the amended URL back to the old URL?

    Read the article

  • URL slugs: ideal length, and the real SEO effects of these slugs

    - by tattvamasi
    this question is addressed widely on SO and outside it, but for some reason, instead of taking it as a good load of great advice, all this information is confusing me. ** Problem ** I already had, on one of my sites, "prettified" urls. I had taken out the query strings, rewritten the URLS, and the link was short enough for me, but had a problem: the ID of the item or post in the URL isn't good for users. One of the users asked is there's a way to get rid of numbers, and I thought it was better for users to just see a clue of the page content in the URL. ** Solution ** With this in mind, I am trying with a section of the site.Armed with 301 redirects, some parsing work, and a lot of patience, I have added the URL slugs to some blog entries, and the slug of the URL reports the title of the article (something close to http://example.com/my-news/terribly-boring-and-long-url-that-replaces-the-number-I-liked-so-much/ ** Problems after Solution ** The problem, as I see it, is that now the URL of those blog articles is very descriptive for sure, but it is also impossible to remember. So, this brings me to the same issue I had with my previous problem: if numbers say nothing and can't be remembered, what's the use of these slugs? I prefer to see http://example.com/my-news/1/ than http://example.com/my-news/terribly-boring-and-long-url-that-replaces-the-number-I-liked-so-much/ To avoid forcing my user to memorize my URLS, I have added a script that finds the closest match to the URL you type, and redirects there. This is something I like, because the page now acts as a sort of little search engine, and users can play with the URLS to find articles. ** Open questions ** I still have some open questions, and don't seem to be able to find an answer, because answers tend to contradict one another. 1) How many characters should an URL ideally be long? I've read the magic number 115 and am sticking to that, but am not sure. 2) Is this really good for SEO? One of those blog articles I have redirected, with ID number in the URL and all, ranked second on Google. I've just found this question, and the answer seems to be consistent with what I think URL slug and SEO - structure (but see this other question with the opposite opinion) 3) To make a question with a specific example, would this URL risk to be penalized? Is it acceptable? Is it too long? StackOverflow seems to have comparably long URLs, but I'm not sure it's a winning strategy in my case. I just wanted to facilitate my users without running into Google's algorithms.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET NVC - Add XHTML into validation error messages

    - by Neil
    Hi, Just starting with ASP.Net MVC and have hit a bit of a snag regarding validation messages. I've a custom validation attribute assigned to my class validate several properties on my model. When this validation fails, we'd like the error message to contain XHTML mark-up, including a link to help page, (this was done in the original WebForms project as a ASP:Panel). At the moment the XHTML tags such as "< a ", in the ErrorMessage are being rendered to the screen. Is there any way to get the ValidationSummary to render the XHTML markup correctly? Or is there a better way to handle this kind of validation? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Support for nested model and class validation with ASP.NET MVC 2.0

    - by Diep-Vriezer
    I'm trying to validate a model containing other objects with validation rules using the System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations attributes was hoping the default MVC implementation would suffice: var obj = js.Deserialize(json, objectInfo.ObjectType); if(!TryValidateModel(obj)) { // Handle failed model validation. } The object is composed of primitive types but also contains other classes which also use DataAnnotications. Like so: public class Entry { [Required] public Person Subscriber { get; set; } [Required] public String Company { get; set; } } public class Person { public String FirstName { get; set;} [Required] public String Surname { get; set; } } The problem is that the ASP.NET MVC validation only goes down 1 level and only evaluates the properties of the top level class, as can be read on digitallycreated.net/Blog/54/deep-inside-asp.net-mvc-2-model-metadata-and-validation. Does anyone know an elegant solution to this? I've tried xVal, but they seem to use a non-recursive pattern (http://blog.stevensanderson.com/2009/01/10/xval-a-validation-framework-for-aspnet-mvc/). Someone must have run into this problem before right? Nesting objects in your model doesn't seem so weird if you're designing a web service.

    Read the article

  • WPF Validation of clipboard Data

    - by Peter
    Hello normal validation is always related to some control, but in my case there is no control to fire validation when its content changes and to show errortemplate to the user. because the data to be validated is in the cipboard. when the user presses "PASTE" button viewmodel processes the data and finds it to be invalid. but what is the best way to invoke WPF validation in this case? as far as i understand using IDataErrorInfo is the way to go, but what is the best way to start validation. and whst is the best way of displaying the error? errortemplate of the button element? Thanks a lot for help. Peter

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC - Add XHTML into validation error messages

    - by Neil
    Hi, Just starting with ASP.Net MVC and have hit a bit of a snag regarding validation messages. I've a custom validation attribute assigned to my class validate several properties on my model. When this validation fails, we'd like the error message to contain XHTML mark-up, including a link to help page, (this was done in the original WebForms project as a ASP:Panel). At the moment the XHTML tags such as "< a ", in the ErrorMessage are being rendered to the screen. Is there any way to get the ValidationSummary to render the XHTML markup correctly? Or is there a better way to handle this kind of validation? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Class-Level Model Validation with EF Code First and ASP.NET MVC 3

    - by ScottGu
    Earlier this week the data team released the CTP5 build of the new Entity Framework Code-First library.  In my blog post a few days ago I talked about a few of the improvements introduced with the new CTP5 build.  Automatic support for enforcing DataAnnotation validation attributes on models was one of the improvements I discussed.  It provides a pretty easy way to enable property-level validation logic within your model layer. You can apply validation attributes like [Required], [Range], and [RegularExpression] – all of which are built-into .NET 4 – to your model classes in order to enforce that the model properties are valid before they are persisted to a database.  You can also create your own custom validation attributes (like this cool [CreditCard] validator) and have them be automatically enforced by EF Code First as well.  This provides a really easy way to validate property values on your models.  I showed some code samples of this in action in my previous post. Class-Level Model Validation using IValidatableObject DataAnnotation attributes provides an easy way to validate individual property values on your model classes.  Several people have asked - “Does EF Code First also support a way to implement class-level validation methods on model objects, for validation rules than need to span multiple property values?”  It does – and one easy way you can enable this is by implementing the IValidatableObject interface on your model classes. IValidatableObject.Validate() Method Below is an example of using the IValidatableObject interface (which is built-into .NET 4 within the System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations namespace) to implement two custom validation rules on a Product model class.  The two rules ensure that: New units can’t be ordered if the Product is in a discontinued state New units can’t be ordered if there are already more than 100 units in stock We will enforce these business rules by implementing the IValidatableObject interface on our Product class, and by implementing its Validate() method like so: The IValidatableObject.Validate() method can apply validation rules that span across multiple properties, and can yield back multiple validation errors. Each ValidationResult returned can supply both an error message as well as an optional list of property names that caused the violation (which is useful when displaying error messages within UI). Automatic Validation Enforcement EF Code-First (starting with CTP5) now automatically invokes the Validate() method when a model object that implements the IValidatableObject interface is saved.  You do not need to write any code to cause this to happen – this support is now enabled by default. This new support means that the below code – which violates one of our above business rules – will automatically throw an exception (and abort the transaction) when we call the “SaveChanges()” method on our Northwind DbContext: In addition to reactively handling validation exceptions, EF Code First also allows you to proactively check for validation errors.  Starting with CTP5, you can call the “GetValidationErrors()” method on the DbContext base class to retrieve a list of validation errors within the model objects you are working with.  GetValidationErrors() will return a list of all validation errors – regardless of whether they are generated via DataAnnotation attributes or by an IValidatableObject.Validate() implementation.  Below is an example of proactively using the GetValidationErrors() method to check (and handle) errors before trying to call SaveChanges(): ASP.NET MVC 3 and IValidatableObject ASP.NET MVC 2 included support for automatically honoring and enforcing DataAnnotation attributes on model objects that are used with ASP.NET MVC’s model binding infrastructure.  ASP.NET MVC 3 goes further and also honors the IValidatableObject interface.  This combined support for model validation makes it easy to display appropriate error messages within forms when validation errors occur.  To see this in action, let’s consider a simple Create form that allows users to create a new Product: We can implement the above Create functionality using a ProductsController class that has two “Create” action methods like below: The first Create() method implements a version of the /Products/Create URL that handles HTTP-GET requests - and displays the HTML form to fill-out.  The second Create() method implements a version of the /Products/Create URL that handles HTTP-POST requests - and which takes the posted form data, ensures that is is valid, and if it is valid saves it in the database.  If there are validation issues it redisplays the form with the posted values.  The razor view template of our “Create” view (which renders the form) looks like below: One of the nice things about the above Controller + View implementation is that we did not write any validation logic within it.  The validation logic and business rules are instead implemented entirely within our model layer, and the ProductsController simply checks whether it is valid (by calling the ModelState.IsValid helper method) to determine whether to try and save the changes or redisplay the form with errors. The Html.ValidationMessageFor() helper method calls within our view simply display the error messages our Product model’s DataAnnotations and IValidatableObject.Validate() method returned.  We can see the above scenario in action by filling out invalid data within the form and attempting to submit it: Notice above how when we hit the “Create” button we got an error message.  This was because we ticked the “Discontinued” checkbox while also entering a value for the UnitsOnOrder (and so violated one of our business rules).  You might ask – how did ASP.NET MVC know to highlight and display the error message next to the UnitsOnOrder textbox?  It did this because ASP.NET MVC 3 now honors the IValidatableObject interface when performing model binding, and will retrieve the error messages from validation failures with it. The business rule within our Product model class indicated that the “UnitsOnOrder” property should be highlighted when the business rule we hit was violated: Our Html.ValidationMessageFor() helper method knew to display the business rule error message (next to the UnitsOnOrder edit box) because of the above property name hint we supplied: Keeping things DRY ASP.NET MVC and EF Code First enables you to keep your validation and business rules in one place (within your model layer), and avoid having it creep into your Controllers and Views.  Keeping the validation logic in the model layer helps ensure that you do not duplicate validation/business logic as you add more Controllers and Views to your application.  It allows you to quickly change your business rules/validation logic in one single place (within your model layer) – and have all controllers/views across your application immediately reflect it.  This help keep your application code clean and easily maintainable, and makes it much easier to evolve and update your application in the future. Summary EF Code First (starting with CTP5) now has built-in support for both DataAnnotations and the IValidatableObject interface.  This allows you to easily add validation and business rules to your models, and have EF automatically ensure that they are enforced anytime someone tries to persist changes of them to a database.  ASP.NET MVC 3 also now supports both DataAnnotations and IValidatableObject as well, which makes it even easier to use them with your EF Code First model layer – and then have the controllers/views within your web layer automatically honor and support them as well.  This makes it easy to build clean and highly maintainable applications. You don’t have to use DataAnnotations or IValidatableObject to perform your validation/business logic.  You can always roll your own custom validation architecture and/or use other more advanced validation frameworks/patterns if you want.  But for a lot of applications this built-in support will probably be sufficient – and provide a highly productive way to build solutions. Hope this helps, Scott P.S. In addition to blogging, I am also now using Twitter for quick updates and to share links. Follow me at: twitter.com/scottgu

    Read the article

  • jQuery Validation Plugin - Enable 'Eager' Validation only after and Invalid Submit

    - by Ryan Fitzer
    By default, if a user enters a value in a field, the 'eager' validation kicks in. Is there any way to disable 'eager' validation before submit and then enable it after an invalid submit has happened? I've used $.validator.setDefaults() to initially set the onkeyup and onfocusout properties to false. In the invalidHandler method I rerun the $.validator.setDefaults(), setting onkeyup and onfocusout properties to true. No luck with this approach. Basically, I only want the 'eager' validation to take place after the user tries to submit an invalid form. Thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • Domain object validation vs view model validation

    - by Brendan Vogt
    I am using ASP.NET MVC 3 and I am using FluentValidation to validate my view models. I am just a little concerned that I might not be on the correct track. As far as what I know, model validation should be done on the domain object. Now with MVC you might have multiple view models that are similar that needs validation. What happens if a property from a domain object occurs in more than one view model? Now you are validating the same property twice, and they might not even be in sync. So if I have a User domain object then I would like to do validation on this object. Now what happens if I have UserAViewModel and UserBViewModel, so now it is multiple validations that needs to be done. The scenario above is just an example, so please don't critise on it.

    Read the article

  • Unobtrusive Client Side Validation with Dynamic Contents in ASP.NET MVC 3

    - by imran_ku07
        Introduction:          A while ago, I blogged about how to perform client side validation for dynamic contents in ASP.NET MVC 2 at here. Using the approach given in that blog, you can easily validate your dynamic ajax contents at client side. ASP.NET MVC 3 also supports unobtrusive client side validation in addition to ASP.NET MVC 2 client side validation for backward compatibility. I feel it is worth to rewrite that blog post for ASP.NET MVC 3 unobtrusive client side validation. In this article I will show you how to do this.       Description:           I am going to use the same example presented at here. Create a new ASP.NET MVC 3 application. Then just open HomeController.cs and add the following code,   public ActionResult CreateUser() { return View(); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult CreateUserPrevious(UserInformation u) { return View("CreateUserInformation", u); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult CreateUserInformation(UserInformation u) { if(ModelState.IsValid) return View("CreateUserCompanyInformation"); return View("CreateUserInformation"); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult CreateUserCompanyInformation(UserCompanyInformation uc, UserInformation ui) { if (ModelState.IsValid) return Content("Thank you for submitting your information"); return View("CreateUserCompanyInformation"); }             Next create a CreateUser view and add the following lines,   <%@ Page Title="" Language="C#" MasterPageFile="~/Views/Shared/Site.Master" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage<UnobtrusiveValidationWithDynamicContents.Models.UserInformation>" %> <asp:Content ID="Content1" ContentPlaceHolderID="TitleContent" runat="server"> CreateUser </asp:Content> <asp:Content ID="Content2" ContentPlaceHolderID="MainContent" runat="server"> <div id="dynamicData"> <%Html.RenderPartial("CreateUserInformation"); %> </div> </asp:Content>             Next create a CreateUserInformation partial view and add the following lines,   <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<UnobtrusiveValidationWithDynamicContents.Models.UserInformation>" %> <% Html.EnableClientValidation(); %> <%using (Html.BeginForm("CreateUserInformation", "Home")) { %> <table id="table1"> <tr style="background-color:#E8EEF4;font-weight:bold"> <td colspan="3" align="center"> User Information </td> </tr> <tr> <td> First Name </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.FirstName)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.FirstName)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Last Name </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.LastName)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.LastName)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Email </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.Email)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.Email)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" align="center"> <input type="submit" name="userInformation" value="Next"/> </td> </tr> </table> <%} %> <script type="text/javascript"> $("form").submit(function (e) { if ($(this).valid()) { $.post('<%= Url.Action("CreateUserInformation")%>', $(this).serialize(), function (data) { $("#dynamicData").html(data); $.validator.unobtrusive.parse($("#dynamicData")); }); } e.preventDefault(); }); </script>             Next create a CreateUserCompanyInformation partial view and add the following lines,   <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<UnobtrusiveValidationWithDynamicContents.Models.UserCompanyInformation>" %> <% Html.EnableClientValidation(); %> <%using (Html.BeginForm("CreateUserCompanyInformation", "Home")) { %> <table id="table1"> <tr style="background-color:#E8EEF4;font-weight:bold"> <td colspan="3" align="center"> User Company Information </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Company Name </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.CompanyName)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.CompanyName)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Company Address </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.CompanyAddress)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.CompanyAddress)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Designation </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.Designation)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.Designation)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" align="center"> <input type="button" id="prevButton" value="Previous"/>   <input type="submit" name="userCompanyInformation" value="Next"/> <%=Html.Hidden("FirstName")%> <%=Html.Hidden("LastName")%> <%=Html.Hidden("Email")%> </td> </tr> </table> <%} %> <script type="text/javascript"> $("#prevButton").click(function () { $.post('<%= Url.Action("CreateUserPrevious")%>', $($("form")[0]).serialize(), function (data) { $("#dynamicData").html(data); $.validator.unobtrusive.parse($("#dynamicData")); }); }); $("form").submit(function (e) { if ($(this).valid()) { $.post('<%= Url.Action("CreateUserCompanyInformation")%>', $(this).serialize(), function (data) { $("#dynamicData").html(data); $.validator.unobtrusive.parse($("#dynamicData")); }); } e.preventDefault(); }); </script>             Next create a new class file UserInformation.cs inside Model folder and add the following code,   public class UserInformation { public int Id { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "First Name is required")] [StringLength(10, ErrorMessage = "First Name max length is 10")] public string FirstName { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Last Name is required")] [StringLength(10, ErrorMessage = "Last Name max length is 10")] public string LastName { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Email is required")] [RegularExpression(@"^\w+([-+.']\w+)*@\w+([-.]\w+)*\.\w+([-.]\w+)*$", ErrorMessage = "Email Format is wrong")] public string Email { get; set; } }             Next create a new class file UserCompanyInformation.cs inside Model folder and add the following code,    public class UserCompanyInformation { public int UserId { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Company Name is required")] [StringLength(10, ErrorMessage = "Company Name max length is 10")] public string CompanyName { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "CompanyAddress is required")] [StringLength(50, ErrorMessage = "Company Address max length is 50")] public string CompanyAddress { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Designation is required")] [StringLength(50, ErrorMessage = "Designation max length is 10")] public string Designation { get; set; } }            Next add the necessary script files in Site.Master,   <script src="<%= Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery-1.4.4.min.js")%>" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="<%= Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery.validate.min.js")%>" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="<%= Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery.validate.unobtrusive.min.js")%>" type="text/javascript"></script>            Now run this application. You will get the same behavior as described in this article. The key important feature to note here is the $.validator.unobtrusive.parse method, which is used by ASP.NET MVC 3 unobtrusive client side validation to initialize jQuery validation plug-in to start the client side validation process. Another important method to note here is the jQuery.valid method which return true if the form is valid and return false if the form is not valid .       Summary:          There may be several occasions when you need to load your HTML contents dynamically. These dynamic HTML contents may also include some input elements and you need to perform some client side validation for these input elements before posting thier values to server. In this article I shows you how you can enable client side validation for dynamic input elements in ASP.NET MVC 3. I am also attaching a sample application. Hopefully you will enjoy this article too.   SyntaxHighlighter.all()

    Read the article

  • Is realtime validation of username good or bad?

    - by iamserious
    I have a simple form for the user to sign up to my site; with email, username and password fields. We are now trying to implement an ajax validation so the user doesn't have to post the form to find out if the username is already taken. I can do this either on keyup event or on text blur event. My question is, which of these is really the best way to do? Keyup From the user POV, it would be good if the validation is done as and when they are typing, (on key up event) - of course, I am waiting for half a second to see if the user stops typing before firing off the request, and user can make any adjustments immediately. But this means I am sending way more requests than if I validated the username on Blur event. Blur The number of requests will be much lower when the validation is done on blur event, But this means the user has to actually go away from the textbox, look at the validation result, and if necessary go back to it to make any changes and repeat the whole process until he gets it right. I had a quick look at google, tumblr, twitter and no one actually does username validations on keyup events, (heck, tubmlr waits for the form to be posted) but I can swear I have seen keyup validations in a lot of places too. So, coming back to the question, will keyup validations be too many for server, is it an unnecessary overhead? or is it worth taking these hits to give user a better experience? ps: all my regex validations etc are already done on javascript and only when it passes all these other criteria does it send a request to server to check if a username already exists. (And the server is doing a select count(1) from user where username = '' - nothing substantial, but still enough to occupy some resource) pps: I'm on asp.net, MS SQL stack., if that matters.

    Read the article

  • ISO 12207 - testing being only validation activity? [closed]

    - by user970696
    Possible Duplicate: How come verification does not include actual testing? ISO norm 12207 states that testing is only validation activity, while all static inspections are verification (that requirement, code.. is complete, correct..). I did found some articles saying its not correct but you know, it is not "official". I would like to understand because there are two different concepts (in books & articles): 1) Verification is all testing except for UAT (because only user can really validate the use). E.g. here OR 2) Verification is everything but testing. All testing is validation. E.g. here Definitions are mostly the same, as Sommerville's: The aim of verification is to check that the software meets its stated functional and non-functional requirements. Validation, however, is a more general process. The aim of validation is to ensure that the software meets the customer’s expectations. It goes beyond simply checking conformance with the specification to demonstrating that the software does what the customer expects it to do It is really bugging me because I tend to agree that functional testing done on a product (SIT) is still verification because I just follow the requirements. But ISO does not agree..

    Read the article

  • Convert a Relative URL to an Absolute URL in Actionscript / Flex

    - by Bear
    I am working with Flex, and I need to take a relative URL source property and convert it to an absolute URL before loading it. The specific case I am working with involves tweaking SoundEffect's load method. I need to determine if a file will be loaded from the local file system or over the network from looking at the source property, and the easiest way I've found to do this is to generate the absolute URL. I'm having trouble generating the absolute URL for sound effect in particular. Here were my initial thoughts, which haven't worked. Look for the DisplayObject that the Sound Effect targets, and use its loaderInfo property. The target is null when the SoundEffect loads, so this doesn't work. Look at FlexGlobals.topLevelApplication, at the url or loaderInfo properties. Neither of these are set, however. Look at the FlexGlobals.topLevelApplication.systemManager.loaderInfo. This was also not set. The SoundEffect.as code basically boils down to var url:String = "mySound.mp3"; /*>> I'd like to convert the URL to absolute form here and tweak it as necessary <<*/ var req:URLRequest = new URLRequest(url); var loader:Loader = new Loader(); loader.load(req); Does anyone know how to do this? Any help clarifying the rules of how relative urls are resolved for URLRequests in ActionScript would also be much appreciated. edit I would also be perfectly satisfied with some way to tell whether the url will be loaded from the local file system or over the network. Looking at an absolute URL it would just be easy to look at the prefix, like file:// or http://.

    Read the article

  • Creating a Reverse Proxy with URL Rewrite for IIS

    - by OWScott
    There are times when you need to reverse proxy through a server. The most common example is when you have an internal web server that isn’t exposed to the internet, and you have a public web server accessible to the internet. If you want to serve up traffic from the internal web server, you can do this through the public web server by creating a tunnel (aka reverse proxy). Essentially, you can front the internal web server with a friendly URL, even hiding custom ports. For example, consider an internal web server with a URL of http://10.10.0.50:8111. You can make that available through a public URL like http://tools.mysite.com/ as seen in the following image. The URL can be made public or it can be used for your internal staff and have it password protected and/or locked down by IP address. This is easy to do with URL Rewrite and IIS. You will also need Application Request Routing (ARR) installed even though for a simple reverse proxy you won’t use most of ARR’s functionality. If you don’t already have URL Rewrite and ARR installed you can do so easily with the Web Platform Installer. A lot can be said about reverse proxies and many different situations and ways to route the traffic and handle different URL patterns. However, my goal here is to get you up and going in the easiest way possible. Then you can dig in deeper after you get the base configuration in place. URL Rewrite makes a reverse proxy very easy to set up. Note that the URL Rewrite Add Rules template doesn’t include Reverse Proxy at the server level. That’s not to say that you can’t create a server-level reverse proxy, but the URL Rewrite rules template doesn’t help you with that. Getting Started First you must create a website on your public web server that has the public bindings that you need. Alternately, you can use an existing site and route using conditions for certain traffic. After you’ve created your site then open up URL Rewrite at the site level. Using the “Add Rule(s)…” template that is opened from the right-hand actions pane, create a new Reverse Proxy rule. If you receive a prompt (the first time) that the proxy functionality needs to be enabled, select OK. This is telling you that a proxy can route traffic outside of your web server, which happens to be our goal in this case. Be aware that reverse proxy rules can be dangerous if you open sites from inside you network to the world, so just be aware of what you’re doing and why. The next and final step of the template asks a few questions. The first textbox asks the name of the internal web server. In our example, it’s 10.10.0.50:8111. This can be any URL, including a subfolder like internal.mysite.com/blog. Don’t include the http or https here. The template assumes that it’s not entered. You can choose whether to perform SSL Offloading or not. If you leave this checked then all requests to the internal server will be over HTTP regardless of the original web request. This can help with performance and SSL bindings if all requests are within a trusted network. If the network path between the two web servers is not completely trusted and safe then uncheck this. Next, the template enables you to create an outbound rule. This is used to rewrite links in the page to look like your public domain name rather than the internal domain name. Outbound rules have a lot of CPU overhead because the entire web content needs to be parsed and updated. However, if you need it, then it’s well worth the extra CPU hit on the web server. If you check the “Rewrite the domain names of the links in HTTP responses” checkbox then the From textbox will be filled in with what you entered for the inbound rule. You can enter your friendly public URL for the outbound rule. This will essentially replace any reference to 10.10.0.50:8111 (or whatever you enter) with tools.mysite.com in all <a>, <form>, and <img> tags on your site. That’s it! Well, there is a lot more that you can do, this but will give you the base configuration. You can now visit www.mysite.com on your public web server and it will serve up the site from your internal web server. You should see two rules show up; one inbound and one outbound. You can edit these, add conditions, and tweak them further as needed. One common issue that can occur without outbound rules has to do with compression. If you run into errors with the new proxied site, try turning off compression to confirm if that’s the issue. Here’s a link with details on how to deal with compression and outbound rules. I hope this was helpful to get started and to see how easy it is to create a simple reverse proxy using URL Rewrite for IIS.

    Read the article

  • Blocking a specific URL by IP (a URL create by mod-rewrite)

    - by Alex
    We need to block a specific URL for anyone not on a local IP (anyone without a 192.168.. address) We however cannot use apache's <Directory /var/www/foo/bar> Order allow,deny Allow from 192.168 </Directory> <Files /var/www/foo/bar> Order allow,deny Allow from 192.168 <Files> Because these would block specific files or directories, we need to block a specific URL which is created by mod-rewrite and the page is dynamically created using PHP. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >