Search Results

Search found 17593 results on 704 pages for 'ajax pro'.

Page 5/704 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Fetch as Googlebot works but Submit to Index does not for AJAX urls

    - by Jennifer
    First I fetch as googlebot, then I am prompted to Submit to Index. This I want to do, but the tool just re-prompts me. This does not happen when I am just submitting a standard url. For those urls I get a confirmation that they were submitted to the index. It only occurs when I am submitting a AJAX url. I know the urls are searchable, as I have performed many tests and see the results using /?_escaped_fragment_= Here is an example url: http://www.townbeam.com/#!events Can someone shed some light on this? Thank you

    Read the article

  • jQuery ajax doesn't work on url without www

    - by steamboy
    The jQuery ajax script below doesn't work on my site if url is without www. I checked Firebug and it doesn't send the ajax call. $.ajax( { type: "POST", url: "http://www.mysite.com/beta/products.php", data: "page_type=index&sort=relevancerank&CartId=<?php echo $CartId;?>&HMAC=<?php echo $HMAC;?>", success: function(msg) { $('#content-holder').html(msg); }, error: function() { alert("An error occurred while updating. Try again in a while"); } });

    Read the article

  • ajax: don't wait for response, but check for it periodically

    - by dnagirl
    I have a PHP process that takes a long time to run. I don't want the AJAX process that calls it to wait for it to finish. When the PHP process finishes it will set a field in a database. There should be some kind of AJAX polling call to check on the database field periodically and set a message. How do I set up a jQuery AJAX call to poll rather than wait? Does the PHP script have to do anything special?

    Read the article

  • Realtime progress of AJAX call (asp.net)

    - by Dynde
    Hi... I'm trying to make a progress bar that updates the user on the progress of the AJAX call. My immediate thinking was that I need an AJAX call to start a thread on the server, allowing the starting AJAX call to finish, and allowing the thread to send updates back to the user. For the purpose of simplicity, disregard the actual progress bar functionality (I was thinking of implementing one of those JS bars, with fancy colors and effects ;), but if I can get an update from the thread, then updating a simple JS progress bar becomes trivial ;) ) I just need a few pointers on how to accomplish this, if anyone could oblige me? ;)

    Read the article

  • success, error events aren't working for ajax

    - by Rigo Vides
    Hi everyone, I have the following code: $(document).ready(function(){ $.ajax({ url: "svc/GetTweetsByUser.php", type: "POST", success: function(data) { alert('success'); }, failure: function(){ alert('fail'); }, data: ({twitter_user : 'AdoboHobo'}), dataType: "xml" } );//endof ajax }); I'm kind of starting with web and ajax stuff... this worked perfectly by yesterday. I don't know what is happening now that neither success nor failure events are triggering. I'm shure that the request and response are perfectly working, I checked that with firebug. Does anyone have any ideas for this? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Ajax.BeginForm is submitting disabled form elements

    - by Fiffe
    Using MVC3 and Ajax.BeginForm I surprisingly discovered that mvc ajax forms submits elements with the attribute disabled="disabled". I have tested both select and text inputs. I was suprised because they should not be submited and they will not when using Html.BeginForm. Is there some hidden option or a workaround for this? [EDIT example] @using (Ajax.BeginForm("Action", "Control", new AjaxOptions() { HttpMethod = "POST" })) { <input type="text" name="_enabled" value="_enabled" /> <input type="text" name="_disabled" value="_disabled" disabled="disabled" /> <input type="submit" value="POST" /> }

    Read the article

  • jQuery Ajax / .each callback, next 'each' firing before ajax completed

    - by StuR
    Hi the below Javascript is called when I submit a form. It first splits a bunch of url's from a text area, it then: 1) Adds lines to a table for each url, and in the last column (the 'status' column) it says "Not Started". 2) Again it loops through each url, first off it makes an ajax call to check on the status (status.php) which will return a percentage from 0 - 100. 3) In the same loop it kicks off the actual process via ajax (process.php), when the process has completed (bearing in the mind the continuous status updates), it will then say "Completed" in the status column and exit the auto_refresh. 4) It should then go to the next 'each' and do the same for the next url. function formSubmit(){ var lines = $('#urls').val().split('\n'); $.each(lines, function(key, value) { $('#dlTable tr:last').after('<tr><td>'+value+'</td><td>Not Started</td></tr>'); }); $.each(lines, function(key, value) { var auto_refresh = setInterval( function () { $.ajax({ url: 'status.php', success: function(data) { $('#dlTable').find("tr").eq(key+1).children().last().replaceWith("<td>"+data+"</td>"); } }); }, 1000); $.ajax({ url: 'process.php?id='+value, success: function(msg) { clearInterval(auto_refresh); $('#dlTable').find("tr").eq(key+1).children().last().replaceWith("<td>completed rip</td>"); } }); }); }

    Read the article

  • ajax-based login fails: IE6 and IE7 ajax calls delete session data (session_id however is kept)

    - by mateipavel
    This question comes after two days of testing and debugging, right after the shock I had seeing that none of the websites i build using ajax-based login work in IE<8 The most simplified scenario si this: 1. mypage.php : session_start(); $_SESSION['mytest'] = 'x'; <script type="text/javascript" src="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.3.2/jquery.min.js"> </script> <script type="text/javascript"> function loadit() { $.post('http://www.mysite.com/myajax.php', {action: 'test'}, function(result){alert(result);}, 'html'); } </script> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="loadit(); return false;">test link</a> 2. myajax.php session_start(); print_r($_SESSION); print session_id(); When I click the "test link", the ajax call is made and the result is alert()-ed: IE6: weird bullet-character (&bull;) IE7: Array( ) <session_id> IE8/FF (Expected behaviour): Array( [mytest] => 'x' ) <session_id> I would really appreciate some pointers regarding: 1. why this happens 2. how to fix it Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Ajax Control Toolkit July 2011 Release and the New HTML Editor Extender

    - by Stephen Walther
    I’m happy to announce the July 2011 release of the Ajax Control Toolkit which includes important bug fixes and a completely new HTML Editor Extender control. You can download the July 2011 Release by visiting the Ajax Control Toolkit CodePlex site at: http://AjaxControlToolkit.CodePlex.com Using the New HTML Editor Extender Control You can use the new HTML Editor Extender to extend any standard ASP.NET TextBox control so that it supports rich formatting such as bold, italics, bulleted lists, numbered lists, typefaces and different foreground and background colors. The following code illustrates how you can extend a standard ASP.NET TextBox control with the HtmlEditorExtender: <%@ Page Language="C#" AutoEventWireup="true" CodeBehind="Simple.aspx.cs" Inherits="WebApplication1.Simple" %> <%@ Register TagPrefix="asp" Namespace="AjaxControlToolkit" Assembly="AjaxControlToolkit" %> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head runat="server"> <title>Simple</title> </head> <body> <form id="form1" runat="server"> <asp:ToolkitScriptManager runat="Server" /> <asp:TextBox ID="txtComments" TextMode="MultiLine" Columns="60" Rows="8" runat="server" /> <asp:HtmlEditorExtender TargetControlID="txtComments" runat="server" /> </form> </body> </html> This page has the following three controls: ToolkitScriptManager – The ToolkitScriptManager renders all of the scripts required by the Ajax Control Toolkit. TextBox – The TextBox control is a standard ASP.NET TextBox which is set to display multiple lines (a TextArea instead of an Input element). HtmlEditorExtender – The HtmlEditorExtender is set to extend the TextBox control. You can use the standard TextBox Text property to read the rich text entered into the TextBox control on the server. Lightweight and HTML5 The HTML Editor Extender works on all modern browsers including the most recent versions of Mozilla Firefox (Firefox 5), Google Chrome (Chrome 12), and Apple Safari (Safari 5). Furthermore, the HTML Editor Extender is compatible with Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 and newer. The HTML Editor Extender is very lightweight. It takes advantage of the HTML5 ContentEditable attribute so it does not require an iframe or complex browser workarounds. If you select View Source in your browser while using the HTML Editor Extender, we hope that you will be pleasantly surprised by how little markup and script is generated by the HTML Editor Extender. Customizable Toolbar Buttons Depending on the web application that you are building, you will want to display different toolbar buttons with the HTML Editor Extender. One of the design goals of the HTML Editor Extender was to make it very easy for you to customize the toolbar buttons. Imagine, for example, that you want to use the HTML Editor Extender when accepting comments on blog posts. In that case, you might want to restrict the type of formatting that a user can display. You might want to enable a user to format text as bold or italic but you do not want the user to make any other formatting changes. The following page illustrates how you can customize the HTML Editor Extender toolbar: <%@ Page Language="C#" AutoEventWireup="true" CodeBehind="CustomToolbar.aspx.cs" Inherits="WebApplication1.CustomToolbar" %> <%@ Register TagPrefix="asp" Namespace="AjaxControlToolkit" Assembly="AjaxControlToolkit" %> <html> <head runat="server"> <title>Custom Toolbar</title> </head> <body> <form id="form1" runat="server"> <asp:ToolkitScriptManager Runat="server" /> <asp:TextBox ID="txtComments" TextMode="MultiLine" Columns="50" Rows="10" Text="Hello <b>world!</b>" Runat="server" /> <asp:HtmlEditorExtender TargetControlID="txtComments" runat="server"> <Toolbar> <asp:Bold /> <asp:Italic /> </Toolbar> </asp:HtmlEditorExtender> </form> </body> </html> Notice that the HTML Editor Extender in the page above has a Toolbar subtag. You can list the toolbar buttons which you want to appear within the subtag. In the case above, only Bold and Italic buttons are displayed. Here is a complete list of the Toolbar buttons currently supported by the HTML Editor Extender: Undo Redo Bold Italic Underline StrikeThrough Subscript Superscript JustifyLeft JustifyCenter JustifyRight JustifyFull InsertOrderedList InsertUnorderedList CreateLink UnLink RemoveFormat SelectAll UnSelect Delete Cut Copy Paste BackgroundColorSelector ForeColorSelector FontNameSelector FontSizeSelector Indent Outdent InsertHorizontalRule HorizontalSeparator Of course the HTML Editor Extender was designed to be extensible. You can create your own buttons and add them to the control. Compatible with the AntiXSS Library When using the HTML Editor Extender on a public facing website, we strongly recommend that you use the HTML Editor Extender with the AntiXSS Library. If you allow users to submit arbitrary HTML, and you don’t take any action to strip out malicious markup, then you are opening your website to Cross-Site Scripting Attacks (XSS attacks). The HTML Editor Extender uses the Provider Model to support different Sanitizer Providers. The July 2011 release of the Ajax Control Toolkit ships with a single Sanitizer Provider which uses the AntiXSS library (see http://AntiXss.CodePlex.com ). A Sanitizer Provider is responsible for sanitizing HTML markup by removing any malicious elements, attributes, and attribute values. For example, the AntiXss Sanitizer Provider will take the following block of HTML: <b><a href=""javascript:doEvil()"">Visit Grandma</a></b> <script>doEvil()</script> And return the following sanitized block of HTML: <b><a href="">Visit Grandma</a></b> Notice that the JavaScript href and <SCRIPT> tag are both stripped out. Be aware that there are a depressingly large number of ways to sneak evil markup into your HTML. You definitely want a Sanitizer as a safety net. Before you can use the AntiXSS Sanitizer Provider, you must add three assemblies to your web application: AntiXSSLibrary.dll, HtmlSanitizationLibrary.dll, and SanitizerProviders.dll. All three assemblies are included with the CodePlex download of the Ajax Control Toolkit in the SanitizerProviders folder. Here’s how you modify your web.config file to use the AntiXSS Sanitizer Provider: <configuration> <configSections> <sectionGroup name="system.web"> <section name="sanitizer" requirePermission="false" type="AjaxControlToolkit.Sanitizer.ProviderSanitizerSection, AjaxControlToolkit"/> </sectionGroup> </configSections> <system.web> <compilation targetFramework="4.0" debug="true"/> <sanitizer defaultProvider="AntiXssSanitizerProvider"> <providers> <add name="AntiXssSanitizerProvider" type="AjaxControlToolkit.Sanitizer.AntiXssSanitizerProvider"></add> </providers> </sanitizer> </system.web> </configuration> You can detect whether the HTML Editor Extender is using the AntiXSS Sanitizer Provider by checking the HtmlEditorExtender SanitizerProvider property like this: if (MyHtmlEditorExtender.SanitizerProvider == null) { throw new Exception("Please enable the AntiXss Sanitizer!"); } When the SanitizerProvider property has the value null, you know that a Sanitizer Provider has not been configured in the web.config file. Because the AntiXSS library requires Full Trust, you cannot use the AntiXSS Sanitizer Provider with most shared website hosting providers. Because most shared hosting providers only support Medium Trust and not Full Trust, we do not recommend using the HTML Editor Extender with a public website hosted with a shared hosting provider. Why a New HTML Editor Control? The Ajax Control Toolkit now includes two HTML Editor controls. Why did we introduce a new HTML Editor control when there was already an existing HTML Editor? We think you will like the new HTML Editor much more than the previous one. We had several goals with the new HTML Editor Extender: Lightweight – We wanted to leverage HTML5 to create a lightweight HTML Editor. The new HTML Editor generates much less markup and script than the previous HTML Editor. Secure – We wanted to make it easy to integrate the AntiXSS library with the HTML Editor. If you are creating a public facing website, we strongly recommend that you use the AntiXSS Provider. Customizable – We wanted to make it easy for users to customize the toolbar buttons displayed by the HTML Editor. Compatibility – We wanted to ensure that the HTML Editor will work with the latest versions of the most popular browsers (including Internet Explorer 6 and higher). The old HTML Editor control is still included in the Ajax Control Toolkit and continues to live in the AjaxControlToolkit.HTMLEditor namespace. We have not modified the control and you can continue to use the control in the same way as you have used it in the past. However, we hope that you will consider migrating to the new HTML Editor Extender for the reasons listed above. Summary We’ve introduced a new Ajax Control Toolkit control with this release. I want to thank the developers and testers on the Superexpert team for the huge amount of work which they put into this control. It was a non-trivial task to build an entirely new control which has the complexity of the HTML Editor in less than 6 weeks. Please let us know what you think! We want to hear your feedback. If you discover issues with the new HTML Editor Extender control, or you have questions about the control, or you have ideas for how it can be improved, then please post them to this blog. Tomorrow starts a new sprint

    Read the article

  • April 2013 Release of the Ajax Control Toolkit

    - by Stephen.Walther
    I’m excited to announce the April 2013 release of the Ajax Control Toolkit. For this release, we focused on improving two controls: the AjaxFileUpload and the MaskedEdit controls. You can download the latest release from CodePlex at http://AjaxControlToolkit.CodePlex.com or, better yet, you can execute the following NuGet command within Visual Studio 2010/2012: There are three builds of the Ajax Control Toolkit: .NET 3.5, .NET 4.0, and .NET 4.5. A Better AjaxFileUpload Control We completely rewrote the AjaxFileUpload control for this release. We had two primary goals. First, we wanted to support uploading really large files. In particular, we wanted to support uploading multi-gigabyte files such as video files or application files. Second, we wanted to support showing upload progress on as many browsers as possible. The previous version of the AjaxFileUpload could show upload progress when used with Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox but not when used with Apple Safari or Microsoft Internet Explorer. The new version of the AjaxFileUpload control shows upload progress when used with any browser. Using the AjaxFileUpload Control Let me walk-through using the AjaxFileUpload in the most basic scenario. And then, in following sections, I can explain some of its more advanced features. Here’s how you can declare the AjaxFileUpload control in a page: <ajaxToolkit:ToolkitScriptManager runat="server" /> <ajaxToolkit:AjaxFileUpload ID="AjaxFileUpload1" AllowedFileTypes="mp4" OnUploadComplete="AjaxFileUpload1_UploadComplete" runat="server" /> The exact appearance of the AjaxFileUpload control depends on the features that a browser supports. In the case of Google Chrome, which supports drag-and-drop upload, here’s what the AjaxFileUpload looks like: Notice that the page above includes two Ajax Control Toolkit controls: the AjaxFileUpload and the ToolkitScriptManager control. You always need to include the ToolkitScriptManager with any page which uses Ajax Control Toolkit controls. The AjaxFileUpload control declared in the page above includes an event handler for its UploadComplete event. This event handler is declared in the code-behind page like this: protected void AjaxFileUpload1_UploadComplete(object sender, AjaxControlToolkit.AjaxFileUploadEventArgs e) { // Save uploaded file to App_Data folder AjaxFileUpload1.SaveAs(MapPath("~/App_Data/" + e.FileName)); } This method saves the uploaded file to your website’s App_Data folder. I’m assuming that you have an App_Data folder in your project – if you don’t have one then you need to create one or you will get an error. There is one more thing that you must do in order to get the AjaxFileUpload control to work. The AjaxFileUpload control relies on an HTTP Handler named AjaxFileUploadHandler.axd. You need to declare this handler in your application’s root web.config file like this: <configuration> <system.web> <compilation debug="true" targetFramework="4.5" /> <httpRuntime targetFramework="4.5" maxRequestLength="42949672" /> <httpHandlers> <add verb="*" path="AjaxFileUploadHandler.axd" type="AjaxControlToolkit.AjaxFileUploadHandler, AjaxControlToolkit"/> </httpHandlers> </system.web> <system.webServer> <validation validateIntegratedModeConfiguration="false"/> <handlers> <add name="AjaxFileUploadHandler" verb="*" path="AjaxFileUploadHandler.axd" type="AjaxControlToolkit.AjaxFileUploadHandler, AjaxControlToolkit"/> </handlers> <security> <requestFiltering> <requestLimits maxAllowedContentLength="4294967295"/> </requestFiltering> </security> </system.webServer> </configuration> Notice that the web.config file above also contains configuration settings for the maxRequestLength and maxAllowedContentLength. You need to assign large values to these configuration settings — as I did in the web.config file above — in order to accept large file uploads. Supporting Chunked File Uploads Because one of our primary goals with this release was support for large file uploads, we added support for client-side chunking. When you upload a file using a browser which fully supports the HTML5 File API — such as Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox — then the file is uploaded in multiple chunks. You can see chunking in action by opening F12 Developer Tools in your browser and observing the Network tab: Notice that there is a crazy number of distinct post requests made (about 360 distinct requests for a 1 gigabyte file). Each post request looks like this: http://localhost:24338/AjaxFileUploadHandler.axd?contextKey={DA8BEDC8-B952-4d5d-8CC2-59FE922E2923}&fileId=B7CCE31C-6AB1-BB28-2940-49E0C9B81C64 &fileName=Sita_Sings_the_Blues_480p_2150kbps.mp4&chunked=true&firstChunk=false Each request posts another chunk of the file being uploaded. Notice that the request URL includes a chunked=true parameter which indicates that the browser is breaking the file being uploaded into multiple chunks. Showing Upload Progress on All Browsers The previous version of the AjaxFileUpload control could display upload progress only in the case of browsers which fully support the HTML5 File API. The new version of the AjaxFileUpload control can display upload progress in the case of all browsers. If a browser does not fully support the HTML5 File API then the browser polls the server every few seconds with an Ajax request to determine the percentage of the file that has been uploaded. This technique of displaying progress works with any browser which supports making Ajax requests. There is one catch. Be warned that this new feature only works with the .NET 4.0 and .NET 4.5 versions of the AjaxControlToolkit. To show upload progress, we are taking advantage of the new ASP.NET HttpRequest.GetBufferedInputStream() and HttpRequest.GetBufferlessInputStream() methods which are not supported by .NET 3.5. For example, here is what the Network tab looks like when you use the AjaxFileUpload with Microsoft Internet Explorer: Here’s what the requests in the Network tab look like: GET /WebForm1.aspx?contextKey={DA8BEDC8-B952-4d5d-8CC2-59FE922E2923}&poll=1&guid=9206FF94-76F9-B197-D1BC-EA9AD282806B HTTP/1.1 Notice that each request includes a poll=1 parameter. This parameter indicates that this is a polling request to get the size of the file buffered on the server. Here’s what the response body of a request looks like when about 20% of a file has been uploaded: Buffering to a Temporary File When you upload a file using the AjaxFileUpload control, the file upload is buffered to a temporary file located at Path.GetTempPath(). When you call the SaveAs() method, as we did in the sample page above, the temporary file is copied to a new file and then the temporary file is deleted. If you don’t call the SaveAs() method, then you must ensure that the temporary file gets deleted yourself. For example, if you want to save the file to a database then you will never call the SaveAs() method and you are responsible for deleting the file. The easiest way to delete the temporary file is to call the AjaxFileUploadEventArgs.DeleteTemporaryData() method in the UploadComplete handler: protected void AjaxFileUpload1_UploadComplete(object sender, AjaxControlToolkit.AjaxFileUploadEventArgs e) { // Save uploaded file to a database table e.DeleteTemporaryData(); } You also can call the static AjaxFileUpload.CleanAllTemporaryData() method to delete all temporary data and not only the temporary data related to the current file upload. For example, you might want to call this method on application start to ensure that all temporary data is removed whenever your application restarts. A Better MaskedEdit Extender This release of the Ajax Control Toolkit contains bug fixes for the top-voted issues related to the MaskedEdit control. We closed over 25 MaskedEdit issues. Here is a complete list of the issues addressed with this release: · 17302 MaskedEditExtender MaskType=Date, Mask=99/99/99 Undefined JS Error · 11758 MaskedEdit causes error in JScript when working with 2-digits year · 18810 Maskededitextender/validator Date validation issue · 23236 MaskEditValidator does not work with date input using format dd/mm/yyyy · 23042 Webkit based browsers (Safari, Chrome) and MaskedEditExtender · 26685 MaskedEditExtender@(ClearMaskOnLostFocus=false) adds a zero character when you each focused to target textbox · 16109 MaskedEditExtender: Negative amount, followed by decimal, sets value to positive · 11522 MaskEditExtender of AjaxtoolKit-1.0.10618.0 does not work properly for Hungarian Culture · 25988 MaskedEditExtender – CultureName (HU-hu) > DateSeparator · 23221 MaskedEditExtender date separator problem · 15233 Day and month swap in Dynamic user control · 15492 MaskedEditExtender with ClearMaskOnLostFocus and with MaskedEditValidator with ClientValidationFunction · 9389 MaskedEditValidator – when on no entry · 11392 MaskedEdit Number format messed up · 11819 MaskedEditExtender erases all values beyond first comma separtor · 13423 MaskedEdit(Extender/Validator) combo problem · 16111 MaskedEditValidator cannot validate date with DayMonthYear in UserDateFormat of MaskedEditExtender · 10901 MaskedEdit: The months and date fields swap values when you hit submit if UserDateFormat is set. · 15190 MaskedEditValidator can’t make use of MaskedEditExtender’s UserDateFormat property · 13898 MaskedEdit Extender with custom date type mask gives javascript error · 14692 MaskedEdit error in “yy/MM/dd” format. · 16186 MaskedEditExtender does not handle century properly in a date mask · 26456 MaskedEditBehavior. ConvFmtTime : function(input,loadFirst) fails if this._CultureAMPMPlaceholder == “” · 21474 Error on MaskedEditExtender working with number format · 23023 MaskedEditExtender’s ClearMaskOnLostFocus property causes problems for MaskedEditValidator when set to false · 13656 MaskedEditValidator Min/Max Date value issue Conclusion This latest release of the Ajax Control Toolkit required many hours of work by a team of talented developers. I want to thank the members of the Superexpert team for the long hours which they put into this release.

    Read the article

  • Web Application: Combining View Layer Between PHP and Javascript-AJAX

    - by wlz
    I'm developing web application using PHP with CodeIgniter MVC framework with a huge real time client-side functionality needs. This is my first time to build large scale of client-side app. So I combine the PHP with a large scale of Javascript modules in one project. As you already know, MVC framework seperate application modules into Model-View-Controller. My concern is about View layer. I could be display the data on the DOM by PHP built-in script tag by load some data on the Controller. Otherwise I could use AJAX to pulled the data -- treat the Controller like a service only -- and display the them by Javascript. Here is some visualization I could put the data directly from Controller: <label>Username</label> <input type="text" id="username" value="<?=$userData['username'];?>"><br /> <label>Date of birth</label> <input type="text" id="dob" value="<?=$userData['dob'];?>"><br /> <label>Address</label> <input type="text" id="address" value="<?=$userData['address'];?>"> Or pull them using AJAX: $.ajax({ type: "POST", url: config.indexURL + "user", dataType: "json", success: function(data) { $('#username').val(data.username); $('#dateOfBirth').val(data.dob); $('#address').val(data.address); } }); So, which approach is better regarding my application has a complex client-side functionality? In the other hand, PHP-CI has a default mechanism to put the data directly from Controller, so why using AJAX?

    Read the article

  • what receives an ajax call?

    - by jbcolmenares
    I'm making a site which should (a) take information from the user in the form of files and forms, (b) take that data to the server to be run on a C application, and (c) take the result back and show it to the user. I was told to look for AJAX for the communication with the server. BTW, I'm using rails. I'm trying to understand how AJAX works. From what I understand so far, with rails is pretty easy to make the call. What I can't figure out is, what waits for that call? what process the call? If I understand correctly, with rails I could make a function in ruby and make it so it's called through AJAX, which means -or so I understand- that it gets executed on the server. If I were using PHP, would I need to make an http server to wait for the AJAX calls? I just don't find information about what waits for the call, and that information is processed. Any links, comments or books are welcome!

    Read the article

  • How do i make an AJAX block crawlable?

    - by Vikas Gulati
    I have a block with a few tabs. When the user clicks the tab the content of that block get loaded. Now I would like to make it crawlable by the search engines and at the same time I want to maintain the good user-experience. I figured out a couple of alternative but each one has its own shortcomings. The approached that i could come up with. Use hashbangs and then use this. But hashbangs are not good and things of past now. Secondly it will make my content crawlable by only googlebot as yahoo and bing dont support this. Use GET PARAMETERIZED fallback incase when javascript doesn't work. This will work for all bots and also would be nice as it would work without javascript. But then this will create duplicates of my page as this block is only a very small section of my page and i have like around 5-6 tabs. So it means that many duplicates! Doing this without AJAX is not an option as it would only increase the page load time as all these blocks have heavy media content in them!

    Read the article

  • How to get search engines to properly index an ajax driven search page

    - by Redtopia
    I have an ajax-driven search page that will allow users to search through a large collection of records. Each search result points to index.php?id=xyz (where xyz is the id of the record). The initial view does not have any records listed, and there is no interface that allows you to browse through all records. You can only conduct a search. How do I build the page so that spiders can crawl each record? Or is there another way (outside of this specific search page) that will allow me to point spiders to a list of all records. FYI, the collection is rather large, so dumping links to every record in a single request is not a workable solution. Outputting the records must be done in multiple requests. Each record can be viewed via a single page (eg "record.php?id=xyz"). I would like all the records indexed without anything indexed from the sitemap that shows where the records exist, for example: <a href="/result.php?id=record1">Record 1</a> <a href="/result.php?id=record2">Record 2</a> <a href="/result.php?id=record3">Record 3</a> <a href="/seo.php?page=2">next</a> Assuming this is the correct approach, I have these questions: How would the search engines find the crawl page? Is it possible to prevent the search engines from indexing the words "Record 1", etc. and "next"? Can I output only the links? Or maybe something like:  

    Read the article

  • Ajax comments form in ASP.NET MVC2

    - by Artiom Chilaru
    I've been playing around with different aspects of MVC for some time now, and I've reached a situation where I'm not sure what would be the best way to solve a problem. I'm hoping that the SO community will help me out here :P I've seen a number of examples of Ajax.BeginForm on the internet, and it seems like a very nifty idea. E.g. you have a dropdown where you select a customer - and on selecting one it will load this client's details in some placeholder on the page. This works perfectly fine. But what to do if you want to tie in some validation in the box? Just hypothetically, imagine an article page, and user comments in the bottom. Below the comments area there's an ajax-y "Add comment" box. When a user adds a comment, it will appear in the comments area, below the last comment there. If I set the Ajax.BeginForm to Append the result of the call to the Comments area, it will work fine. But what if the data posted is not valid? Instead of appending a "successful" comment to the comments area I have to show the user validation errors. At this point I decided that the area INSIDE the Ajax.BeginForm will be inside a partial, and the form's submits will return this partial. Validation works fine. On each submit we reload the contents inside the form element. But how to add the successful comment to the top? Other things to consider: The comment form also has a "Preview" button. When the user clicks on Preview, I should load the rendered comment into a preview box. This will probably be inside the form area as well. I was thinking of using Json results instead. When the user submits the form, the server code will generate a Json object with a Success value, and html rendered partials as some properties. Something like { "success": true, "form": "<html form data>", "comment": "successful comment html to inject into the page" } This would be a perfect solution, except there's no way in MVC to render a partial into a string, inside the controller (separation of context, remember?). So.. what should I do then? Any "correct" way to implement this?

    Read the article

  • Ajax comments form in ASP.NET MVC2, howto?

    - by Artiom Chilaru
    I've been playing around with different aspects of MVC for some time now, and I've reached a situation where I'm not sure what would be the best way to solve a problem. I'm hoping that the SO community will help me out here :P I've seen a number of examples of Ajax.BeginForm on the internet, and it seems like a very nifty idea. E.g. you have a dropdown where you select a customer - and on selecting one it will load this client's details in some placeholder on the page. This works perfectly fine. But what to do if you want to tie in some validation in the box? Just hypothetically, imagine an article page, and user comments in the bottom. Below the comments area there's an ajax-y "Add comment" box. When a user adds a comment, it will appear in the comments area, below the last comment there. If I set the Ajax.BeginForm to Append the result of the call to the Comments area, it will work fine. But what if the data posted is not valid? Instead of appending a "successful" comment to the comments area I have to show the user validation errors. At this point I decided that the area INSIDE the Ajax.BeginForm will be inside a partial, and the form's submits will return this partial. Validation works fine. On each submit we reload the contents inside the form element. But how to add the successful comment to the top? Other things to consider: The comment form also has a "Preview" button. When the user clicks on Preview, I should load the rendered comment into a preview box. This will probably be inside the form area as well. I was thinking of using Json results instead. When the user submits the form, the server code will generate a Json object with a Success value, and html rendered partials as some properties. Something like { "success": true, "form": "<html form data>", "comment": "successful comment html to inject into the page" } This would be a perfect solution, except there's no way in MVC to render a partial into a string, inside the controller (separation of context, remember?). So.. what should I do then? Any "correct" way to implement this? Anyone???

    Read the article

  • UTF8 encoding not working when using ajax.

    - by Ronedog
    I recently changed some of my pages to be displayed via ajax and I am having some confusion as to why the utf8 encoding is now displaying a question mark inside of a box, whereas before it wasn't. Fore example. The oringal page was index.php. charset was explicitly set to utf8 and is in the <head>. I then used php to query the database Heres is the original index.php page: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd"> <html lang="en"> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> <title>Title here</title> </head> <body class='body_bgcolor' > <div id="main_container"> <?php Data displayed via php was simply a select statement that output the HTML. ?> </div> However, when I made the change to add a menu that populated the "main_container" via ajax all the utf8 encoding stopped working. Here's the new code: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd"> <html lang="en"> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> <title>Title here</title> </head> <body class='body_bgcolor' > <a href="#" onclick="display_html('about_us');"> About Us </a> <div id="main_container"></div> The "display_html()" function calls the javascript page which uses jquery ajax call to retrieve the html stored inside a php page, then places the html inside the div with an id of "main_container". I'm setting the charset in jquery to be utf8 like: $.ajax({ async: false, type: "GET", url: url, contentType: "charset=utf-8", success: function(data) { $("#main_container").html(data); } }); What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Is it worth learning ASP.Net AJAX

    - by Yogendra
    Hi All, I know this is a duplicate kind of question. I have worked with ASP.Net and ASP.Net MVC 1.0. I never really got a chance to get into ASP.Net AJAX. My question is it really worth to invest in learning ASP.Net AJAX 3.5 or 4.0 given the fact, I have hardly used it ? Please let me know your advise.

    Read the article

  • Get variables in c# from ajax call

    - by fzshah76
    I've got an Ajax call for log in here is the code: //if MOUSE class is clicked $('.mouse').click(function () { //get the form to submit and return a message //how to call the function var name = $('#name').val(); var pwd2 = $('#pwd2').val(); $.ajax({ type:"POST", url: "http://localhost:51870/code/Login.aspx", data: "{ 'name':'" + $('#name').val() + "', 'pwd':'" + $('#pwd2').val() + "' }", contentType: "application/json; charset=utf-8", dataType: "json", context: document.body, success: function () { //$(this).addClass("done"); $(this).hide(); $('.mouse, .window').hide(); } }); }); the problem is I can't seem to catch name and pwd variables in Login page's preinit event or page load event here is the code in c#: protected void Page_PreInit(object sender, EventArgs e) { //taking javascript argument in preinit event //from here I'll have to build the page for specific lookbook var name = Request.QueryString["name"]; var pwd = Request.QueryString["pwd"]; } protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { var name = Request.QueryString["name"]; var pwd = Request.QueryString["pwd"]; SignIn(name); } I can't seem to get username name and password in c# side, help is appreciated. Here is my final javascript code c# code remains the same: <script type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { //if MOUSE class is clicked $('.mouse').click(function () { var name = $('#name').val(); var pwd = $('#pwd').val(); $.ajax({ url: "http://localhost:51870/code/Login.aspx?name="+ name +"&pwd="+pwd, context: document.body, success: function () { //$(this).addClass("done"); $(this).hide(); $('.mouse, .window').hide(); } }); }); }); </script> Thanks Zachary

    Read the article

  • My AJAX is only firing once,

    - by sea_1987
    Hi There, I ahave some ajax that is fired when a checkbox is clicked, it essentially sends a query string to a PHP script and then returns the relevant HTML, however, if I select a select it works fine if I then slect another checkbox as well as the previous I get no activity what so ever, not even any errors in firebug, it is very curious, does anyone have any ideas? //Location AJAX //var dataObject = new Object(); var selected = new Array(); //alert(selected); $('#areas input.radio').change(function(){ // will trigger when the checked status changes var checked = $(this).attr("checked"); // will return "checked" or false I think. // Do whatever request you like with the checked status if(checked == true) { //selected.join('&'); selected = $('input:checked').map(function() { return $(this).attr('name')+"="+$(this).val(); }).get(); getQuery = selected.join('&')+"&location_submit=Next"; alert(getQuery); $.ajax({ type:"POST", url:"/search/location", data: getQuery, success:function(data){ //alert(getQuery); //console.log(data); $('body.secEmp').html(data); } }); } else { //do something to remove the content here alert($(this).attr('name')); } });

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET Ajax - Asynch request has separate session???

    - by Marcus King
    We are writing a search application that saves the search criteria to session state and executes the search inside of an asp.net updatepanel. Sometimes when we execute multiple searches successively the 2nd or 3rd search will sometimes return results from the first set of search criteria. Example: our first search we do a look up on "John Smith" - John Smith results are displayed. The second search we do a look up on "Bob Jones" - John Smith results are displayed. We save all of the search criteria in session state as I said, and read it from session state inside of the ajax request to format the DB query. When we put break points in VS everything behaves as normal, but without them we get the original search criteria and results. My guess is because they are saved in session, that the ajax request somehow gets its own session and saves the criteria to that, and then retrieves the criteria from that session every time, but the non-async stuff is able to see when the criteria is modified and saves the changes to state accordingly, but because they are from two different sessions there is a disparity in what is saved and read. EDIT::: To elaborate more, there was a suggestion of appending the search criteria to the query string which normally is good practice and I agree thats how it should be but following our requirements I don't see it as being viable. They want it so the user fills out the input controls hits search and there is no page reload, the only thing they see is a progress indicator on the page, and they still have the ability to navigate and use other features on the current page. If I were to add criteria to the query string I would have to do another request causing the whole page to load, which depending on the search criteria can take a really long time. This is why we are using an ajax call to perform the search and why we aren't causing another full page request..... I hope this clarifies the situation.

    Read the article

  • MS Ajax Libraries and Configured Assemblies

    - by smehaffie
    Use Case You have a brand new IIS servers that has .Net 3.5 installed and are migrating sites to the new servers.  In the process of migrating sites you come across some sites that get an error about the version of AJAX libraries being references in the web.config.  In the web.config all the entries reference 1.0.61025.0, but the older version of the AJAX libraries are not installed on the new servers, only the latest version is installed that comes with .Net 3.5.  So what are the options to fix this issue. Solutions 1) Install the older version of the AJAX Libraries: Although this works, IMO it is never a great idea to install an older version of a library after a newer version has been installed.  Plus, if all new application use the latest versions, is it worth the effort of installing the older version for a few legacy applications? 2) Update the web.config files so all references use latest version (3.5.0.0):  This option is very time consuming and error prone. In addition, you will also have to update any pages where there is a register tag for the older libraries as well.  This would require you to redeploy any application that have this issue. 3) Use the Configured Assembly capabilities of .Net (aka: Assembly Bindings) to make any application that uses the older AJAX libraries to use the new AJAX libraries.  IMO, this is the easiest, quickest and least invasive way to fix the issue.  Below are the steps to implement this fix. Solution #3 Do the following steps on the IIS servers that the issue is occurring.  The 2 assemblies that need assemblies bindings created are: System.Web.Extension & System.Web.Extensions.Design 1) Go to Start - > All Program -> Administrative Tools -> Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 Configuration. 2) Right click on "Configured Assemblies" to view list of configured assemblies. 3) Left Click on right pane to bring up menu and choose "Add". 4) Make sure "Choose and assembly from the assembly cache is checked" and click the "Choose Assembly" button. 5) Choose System.Web.Extension (does not matter what version). 6) Click the "Finish" button. 7) Binding Policy Tab      - Enter Requested Version = 1.0.61025.0      - Enter New Version = 3.5.0.0 8) Repeat steps 2-7 for the System.Web.Extensions.Design assembly. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: If "Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 Configuration does not exist under Admin tools use mmc to access it (see below) 1) Start -> Run -> Enter MMC 2) File - > Add/Remove Snap-In then Click "Add" button 3) Choose ".Net 2.0 Configuration" then click "Add" button and then the "Close" Button. 4) On "Add/Remove Snapin" windows click the "OK" Button. 5) Expand the tree on the right and you can start following the directions above for adding the configured assemblies. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Read the article

  • ajax : multiple ajax calls for included js files inside jsp fragment

    - by Nrj
    I am including a jsp fragment by making an ajax call. Now this jsp frag happened to include several js files. When the ajax request is completed, it is loading each of the included js files (on fragments) using a separate get request. (I checked this using firebug.) Now is this the correct behavior (making separate get calls) or am I missing something. Is there a way to include the js files and send the response in one go ?

    Read the article

  • Anti-Forgery Request Recipes For ASP.NET MVC And AJAX

    - by Dixin
    Background To secure websites from cross-site request forgery (CSRF, or XSRF) attack, ASP.NET MVC provides an excellent mechanism: The server prints tokens to cookie and inside the form; When the form is submitted to server, token in cookie and token inside the form are sent in the HTTP request; Server validates the tokens. To print tokens to browser, just invoke HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken():<% using (Html.BeginForm()) { %> <%: this.Html.AntiForgeryToken(Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)%> <%-- Other fields. --%> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> <% } %> This invocation generates a token then writes inside the form:<form action="..." method="post"> <input name="__RequestVerificationToken" type="hidden" value="J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP" /> <!-- Other fields. --> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> </form> and also writes into the cookie: __RequestVerificationToken_Lw__= J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP When the above form is submitted, they are both sent to server. In the server side, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute is used to specify the controllers or actions to validate them:[HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult Action(/* ... */) { // ... } This is very productive for form scenarios. But recently, when resolving security vulnerabilities for Web products, some problems are encountered. Specify validation on controller (not on each action) The server side problem is, It is expected to declare [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] on controller, but actually it has be to declared on each POST actions. Because POST actions are usually much more then controllers, the work would be a little crazy. Problem Usually a controller contains actions for HTTP GET and actions for HTTP POST requests, and usually validations are expected for HTTP POST requests. So, if the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] is declared on the controller, the HTTP GET requests become invalid:[ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller // One [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute. { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Index() cannot work. { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } If browser sends an HTTP GET request by clicking a link: http://Site/Some/Index, validation definitely fails, because no token is provided. So the result is, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute must be distributed to each POST action:public class SomeController : Controller // Many [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes. { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Works. { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } This is a little bit crazy, because one application can have a lot of POST actions. Solution To avoid a large number of [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes (one for each POST action), the following ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute wrapper class can be helpful, where HTTP verbs can be specified:[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)] public class ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute : FilterAttribute, IAuthorizationFilter { private readonly ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute _validator; private readonly AcceptVerbsAttribute _verbs; public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs) : this(verbs, null) { } public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs, string salt) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = salt }; } public void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext) { string httpMethodOverride = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.GetHttpMethodOverride(); if (this._verbs.Verbs.Contains(httpMethodOverride, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { this._validator.OnAuthorization(filterContext); } } } When this attribute is declared on controller, only HTTP requests with the specified verbs are validated:[ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper(HttpVerbs.Post, Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller { // GET actions are not affected. // Only HTTP POST requests are validated. } Now one single attribute on controller turns on validation for all POST actions. Maybe it would be nice if HTTP verbs can be specified on the built-in [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute, which is easy to implemented. Specify Non-constant salt in runtime By default, the salt should be a compile time constant, so it can be used for the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] or [ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper] attribute. Problem One Web product might be sold to many clients. If a constant salt is evaluated in compile time, after the product is built and deployed to many clients, they all have the same salt. Of course, clients do not like this. Even some clients might want to specify a custom salt in configuration. In these scenarios, salt is required to be a runtime value. Solution In the above [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] and [ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper] attribute, the salt is passed through constructor. So one solution is to remove this parameter:public class ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute : FilterAttribute, IAuthorizationFilter { public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = AntiForgeryToken.Value }; } // Other members. } But here the injected dependency becomes a hard dependency. So the other solution is moving validation code into controller to work around the limitation of attributes:public abstract class AntiForgeryControllerBase : Controller { private readonly ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute _validator; private readonly AcceptVerbsAttribute _verbs; protected AntiForgeryControllerBase(HttpVerbs verbs, string salt) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = salt }; } protected override void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext) { base.OnAuthorization(filterContext); string httpMethodOverride = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.GetHttpMethodOverride(); if (this._verbs.Verbs.Contains(httpMethodOverride, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { this._validator.OnAuthorization(filterContext); } } } Then make controller classes inheriting from this AntiForgeryControllerBase class. Now the salt is no long required to be a compile time constant. Submit token via AJAX For browser side, once server side turns on anti-forgery validation for HTTP POST, all AJAX POST requests will fail by default. Problem In AJAX scenarios, the HTTP POST request is not sent by form. Take jQuery as an example:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 // Token is not posted. }, callback); This kind of AJAX POST requests will always be invalid, because server side code cannot see the token in the posted data. Solution Basically, the tokens must be printed to browser then sent back to server. So first of all, HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() need to be called somewhere. Now the browser has token in both HTML and cookie. Then jQuery must find the printed token in the HTML, and append token to the data before sending:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1, __RequestVerificationToken: getToken() // Token is posted. }, callback); To be reusable, this can be encapsulated into a tiny jQuery plugin:/// <reference path="jquery-1.4.2.js" /> (function ($) { $.getAntiForgeryToken = function (tokenWindow, appPath) { // HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() must be invoked to print the token. tokenWindow = tokenWindow && typeof tokenWindow === typeof window ? tokenWindow : window; appPath = appPath && typeof appPath === "string" ? "_" + appPath.toString() : ""; // The name attribute is either __RequestVerificationToken, // or __RequestVerificationToken_{appPath}. tokenName = "__RequestVerificationToken" + appPath; // Finds the <input type="hidden" name={tokenName} value="..." /> from the specified. // var inputElements = $("input[type='hidden'][name='__RequestVerificationToken" + appPath + "']"); var inputElements = tokenWindow.document.getElementsByTagName("input"); for (var i = 0; i < inputElements.length; i++) { var inputElement = inputElements[i]; if (inputElement.type === "hidden" && inputElement.name === tokenName) { return { name: tokenName, value: inputElement.value }; } } return null; }; $.appendAntiForgeryToken = function (data, token) { // Converts data if not already a string. if (data && typeof data !== "string") { data = $.param(data); } // Gets token from current window by default. token = token ? token : $.getAntiForgeryToken(); // $.getAntiForgeryToken(window). data = data ? data + "&" : ""; // If token exists, appends {token.name}={token.value} to data. return token ? data + encodeURIComponent(token.name) + "=" + encodeURIComponent(token.value) : data; }; // Wraps $.post(url, data, callback, type). $.postAntiForgery = function (url, data, callback, type) { return $.post(url, $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data), callback, type); }; // Wraps $.ajax(settings). $.ajaxAntiForgery = function (settings) { settings.data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(settings.data); return $.ajax(settings); }; })(jQuery); In most of the scenarios, it is Ok to just replace $.post() invocation with $.postAntiForgery(), and replace $.ajax() with $.ajaxAntiForgery():$.postAntiForgery(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 }, callback); // Token is posted. There might be some scenarios of custom token, where $.appendAntiForgeryToken() is useful:data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, token); // Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery(). $.post(url, data, callback); And there are scenarios that the token is not in the current window. For example, an HTTP POST request can be sent by an iframe, while the token is in the parent window. Here, token's container window can be specified for $.getAntiForgeryToken():data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, $.getAntiForgeryToken(window.parent)); // Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery(). $.post(url, data, callback); If you have better solution, please do tell me.

    Read the article

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