This is what I am trying to do, when my apps load, user is presented with a bunch of options ( These options are coming from a server) and when user selects one of those options I have to create a new tab bar controller with number of tabs, their name, their layout all coming from a server in the xml format. So the first question is it possible to do this in iphone, that is create all the view controller programmatically on the run time, if yes can you please point me to some reference, i have been searching in google, but may be my search terms are not good, I am not getting back any results.
Of course, it's possible. Anything that can be done using IB can also be done in code. In your particular case, you have to subclass the UITabBarController class and then use the viewControllers property to populate the bar at runtime, depending on your XML.
Please refer to the class reference at Apple.com for more information.
Possible duplicate of iPhone -- create UITabBar programmatically?
Related
I want to know if I can click a button in my XPage and dynamically create a Domino View and then show it in a panel control on the same page. The reason I want to do this is because I have a categorized view and I don't want to lose category data by using full text search. So I am thinking of creating a new view dynamically and pass my search parameters, like end date or start date, into the view selection formula.
Is it possible? Any other alternative solution is also welcome.
yes you can, but you don't want to. A Domino view takes space in the database and quite some time for its first use. So you end up with a lot of views taking space and the need to adjust database space after removal. Your response times will suck big time.
Categories as shown in Notes views are no web interaction pattern, so you might want to solve a problem that actually shouldn't exist.
The preferred method for Domino application is navigation / drill down over search. But you could do a FTSearch where you add your category to the search parameters and render your results in a repeat control instead of a view control. There you have more control over the look and feel.
Whether or not it's the best solution, the answer to the immediate question about creating a view on the fly is yes: the Database class has a couple "createView" methods to allow you to create a new view, either entirely from scratch or based on a named other view. From there, you can use the "setSelectionFormula" and "createColumn" methods in the created View to build what you want. You can't do EVERYTHING with those methods, but it may be enough.
One problem you'd likely run into is ACL access: you'll need Designer rights to the database, which a normal user most likely wouldn't have. If you use the sessionAsSigner object to fetch a signer version of the DB (say, "var signerDB = sessionAsSigner.getDatabase(database.getServer(), database.getFilePath())"), you can work from there. Off the top of my head, I don't remember if you will also have to up the "Maximum Internet access" setting on the last tab of the ACL to Designer as well, but you may.
I am assuming that you are referring to the problem that exists when you choose the documents based on the category. This is something that I find highly annoying and I wish that it was possible to turn this on and off. It makes sense for embedded views, but not for much else.
What I did to solve this was to include the category value in the next column. In this way that text could still be seen, even if it was a flat view.
Alternatively, you could also look into using a repeater control and create your own way of presenting the information. This would be used instead of a (Dynamic)ViewPanel control. You could then present the information any way you wanted as long as it is returned in the viewrow set.
Happy Programming!
Our Orchard application displays two of all notifications that are added to the notification service. So far we have traced the problem and know what is causing it, but are looking for a solution other than the obvious, for reasons I shall now elaborate.
So we are using a number of themes to render our Orchard based application. Within our layout, we have a Razor call to draw a header bar that displays a set of information about the user that is logged in.
#Html.Action("OutOfGameHeader", "Options", new { area = "Area.area.Location.Common" })
This action calls the OnResultExecuting() method in Orchard.UI.Notify.NotifyFilter which (among other things) populates the Messages Zone with the current set of notifications. When we make the call the render the Messages Zone, this same method runs again and the notifications are added to the Zone's shape again resulting in duplicate notification being displayed when the Zone is actually drawn.
Can anyone think of a solution that meets the following criteria:
Drawing the header without calling #Html.Action() to avoid OnResultExecuting() being triggered the first time.
Without creating a new Widget in a new Zone as this would involve us changing the manifest for dozens of existing themes to include it.
We also found this just below the point in the code where the notifications are added to the Zone, so if anyone knows anything more about it, that would be helpful too.
//todo: (heskew) probably need to keep duplicate messages from being pushed into the zone like the previous behavior
//baseViewModel.Messages = baseViewModel.Messages == null ? messageEntries .Messages.Union(messageEntries).ToList();
//baseViewModel.Zones.AddRenderPartial("content:before", "Messages", baseViewModel.Messages);
Any thoughts greatly appreciated.
Avoid Html.Action. This runs through the whole lifecycle as if this was a new request. That you think you need it is often a sign that you need to refactor and extract that logic that you want to re-use out of your controller. In Orchard, it's also better to use dynamic shapes.
I've created my own solution with a custom entity of type activity. I'd like to show a message whenever a new instance of it is created using an existing contact but not allow the user to create one, if only attempting to do that without going via contact.
Basically, my aim is that it won't be impossible to just create that activity (the form will be hidden directly at any attempt except for one way only). The user will have to go to contacts (or leads etc.) and in there add and create an instance of the custom activity entity. That way, I can assure that the field "regarding" will be filled out already.
I'm guessing that I need to detect somehow that the opening of the form is a creation attempt. How can I do that?
Also, as it is now, the user can't create a contact-less activity of the custom type because it doesn't appear on the menu with other activities. I must have disabled it somehow but I have no idea how. Anybody who has one?
You could do this a bunch of ways but the easiest would probably be to:
Make the regarding field read only.
Make the regarding field mandatory.
That way if a user opens a create new form they wont be able to set the regarding and because its mandatory they wont be able to save the record. When they open via an existing contact the regarding field will be mapped automatically. That said in this case just making it mandatory my be enough.
(As a side JavaScript can be used to identify the current form state, but I'm not sure how useful that is here).
In terms of where custom activities appear, by default mine show in a number of locations, for example:
CRM > Workplace > Activities > Ribbon > Other Activities > XXX.
CRM > Workplace > Activities > View Selector > XXX.
They don't show under the left hand navigation of the workplace because they are grouped under 'Activities'. I'm pretty sure these are all the default settings.
You can exercise greater control by editing the sitemap, where you can put pretty much anything, anywhere.
In addition to Mr Wood, I'd like to show you some code. It works as supposed to but I'm not sure if it's optimal.
var foo = function () {
var whatIsGoingOn = Xrm.Page.ui.getFormType();
if (whatIsGoingOn === 1)
alert("Let there be an entity!");
else
alert("Not a creation...");
}
The other states' (deletion, update etc.) numeric values are listed here.
Answering the second part of your question:
When you create a custom activity you can choose whether to have it appear in 'normal' Activity menus or not by checking the box at the top right of the entity form. This is a once-only choice as far as I know and can't be changed later.
For your setup, I would suggest NOT checking this box, so it does not appear in the activity menus to avoid users even being tempted to do it that way.
Instead, add an explicit relationship to the activity N:1 to Contact, and another N:1 to Lead. Use this relationship to add your activity to the left navigation of Contact and Lead forms, or add a grid for them (depends on how you want to use this and if you need to filter the view to something other than the default "Associated View").
When a user navigates to this section they will see if any previous activities of this type exist, and be able to add a new one. BUT this means that the child record is a child via this relationship, not using "regarding", so use a script on the form for the activity so that if Contact is filled in, it is copied to Regarding, and if Lead is filled in then that is copied. If neither, then use an alert or other means to warn the use that something is wrong (see comment earlier). If you want Regarding to be read-only but filled in by script, you will need to make sure to use the force the value to be saved:
Xrm.Page.getAttribute("regardingobjectid").setSubmitMode("always");
You must have the lookups for Contact and Lead on the form to be able to use them in your scripts, but you can make them not "visible by default" so they are there but not seen by the user (and taking up no space).
We have been developing our application using ExtJs 4.0.7, and now we have a new feature request which will allow user to set the position of form fields, as per his choice, using drag and drop.
For example, if currently a form has fields arranged in rows, then the user can pick these fields and arrange them in columns, or he can move a field from first row to second etc..
The user is also allowed to save this layout and when he opens the screen again then he gets to see the fields arranged in the same manner he saved.
I have not been able to locate any example in ExtJS carrying such a functionality, so I was wondering if this is possible in ExtJS?
Also, as the user is allowed to save the layout, thus, will this involve storing of ExtJs code in database or dynamic generation of ExtJS code from server side.
Looking forward to guidance at this.
Thanks in advance.
The only example of such a beast I have seen is the Sencha Designer. It saved the complete JSON object that represents the form config ... I suppose it's doable, but good luck :)
I am using Microsoft coded-ui testing (CUIT) in VS 2010 Ultimate to test an ASP.Net 4.0 site.
I have the source code to the ASP.Net site, so I can modify it as needed.
I've got record/playback working.
I can write simple assert statements in the test methods to check properties of the UITestControl descendents (HTML links, tables, etc.) and compare them to expected values.
I want to add properties to user controls (ASCX's) and pages in my site, to pass back useful values to the testing code.
For example, I have a user control that implements a menu which displays different sets of menu items depending on the role of the current user.
Rather than having the test script click at the various menu items to check whether or not they're present, I want to add a property to the user control. This property will return info to the caller, listing the menus and menu items present.
I've found info on the Net on how to do this in WinForms, but this code relies on accessability, which I believe is only useful for CUIT with WinForms. Likewise, I've found info on how to do it with WPF/SL.
The answer may be related to getting the UITestControl.NativeElement property, then calling a method that overrides GetProperty(), but I haven't been able to get this approach to work.
Can anyone provide a short code sample showing how to add a property to an ASCX or ASPX page, where that property can be written in C# code-behind, and read by Microsoft Coded UI Testing (CUIT) code?
Thanks!
Adam Leffert
http://www.leffert.com
I haven't found an answer to this question, but I have written some code to solve the underlying problem.
I realized that adding properties to user controls would keep the validation data together with the control under test, but only for the case where the section of UI was implemented as a user control.
There are at least two other cases I need to cover:
1) Third-party controls added to the page, for example ASPxGridView, ASPxTreeView, etc.
2) Items that are not visible in the UI, for example the user profile data for the current user.
When you're running CUIT validation code with a Web app, the data you have available is DOM data, i.e. a tree that represents the contents of the Document Object Model of the contents of the browser window. There is no Request object, .Net Page object, etc. This DOM data is accessible through the UIMap object.
I don't want to wrap the third-party controls in user controls, because doing so would disturb the application under test, causing me to re-write the application code that touches properties and events of the grid, tree view, etc. Too intrusive for testing code.
So I created a code interface (ITestable) that contains a dictionary of string values, and a list of ITestable children.
In the LoadComplete event handler of the master page, I create an ITestable for the master page and fill the list with child ITestable objects for the child page, which can themselves contain lists of children.
I serialize this object into JSON, then store it in a hidden field on the master page.
I added the hidden field to the UIMap.
The test validation code deserializes the ITestable, then looks through it for values that need validation.
The controls create their own ITestable objects, so they can easily fill the objects with values that may be needed for validation, rather than forcing the test code to manipulate the UI trying to read validation values.
For example, a tree view could return its contents without the testing code having to click on each node and try to read the value displayed there. Additional properties (visible, enabled, etc.) can be stored in the values dictionary for each ITestable object.
CUIT has some very powerful features. I would very much appreciate it if Microsoft would document some best practices for solving these non-trivial validation problems. I've read through the Microsoft documentation but haven't found much on this topic for Web apps.