I'm using a global .resx file for all of the strings in my project to simplify providing all of the translations we will need. So for each of my forms instead of setting Localizable to true, I instead create a global Resourcemanager manager in my constructor like this:
GlobalObjects::rm1 = gcnew System::Resources::ResourceManager(L"Hycal_PC_Software.AppLocalization", Assembly::GetExecutingAssembly());
InitializeComponent();
And then I set the Text values of various form elements like this:
this->fileToolStripMenuItem->Text = GlobalObjects::rm1->GetString(L"File");
Works fine when running the app, but now when I go to design view for a form I get the horrible error page instead of my form because it doesn't like the rm1->. In hindsight it seems obvious it wouldn't but what is the correct way to deal with this? I really don't want to have to have individual .resx files for each form, particularly because they will also contain all sorts of things I don't want to localize.
Related
Not really a code problem more a discussion/brainstroming-post.
I would like to build some light CMS in Vue/Nuxt, which will output a static website in the end.
So I thought about going for one Nuxt-page (does not have to be a Nuxt-page necessarily) containing all the CMS-related stuff and handle the actual website inside a nuxt-child component to keep code tidy.
Problem is, that i can not access the inner Nuxt page, so any editing will be impossible (I want to achieve some simple inline-editing).
For visualization the editor of webflow may be helpful (Directlink to the video). What i want to achieve is a similar version. I would like to have the page separated from the CMS. The CMS would be the lower bottom-bar and provide stuff like the editor for the inline-editing.
Currently my best solution was to define the editing directly inside the page, which is working, but needs to be stripped out for production and makes a future separation impossible.
Is there any solution for this? Or am I thinking the wrong way?
Can I link both instances with a common vuex-store?
You could created two seperate components, one for editing and one for rendering.
These could utilize components themselves to keep the overhead to a minimun.
You could also use the same component, but lazy load the editor features based on some condition like:
If youre fine with having the Editor only available during development you can create an env variable and check for process.env.NODE_ENV !== 'production'
Another way would be to have some sort of authorization that combined with v-if would show the editor or hide it.
I was able to get Aurelia-validation working on a dynamically created form when using the compose element, but I've switched to custom elements for better encapsulation and reuse of the custom controls. However, now my validation seems to be half-broken.
https://gist.run/?id=6e97538c3888cae0f6134faed9d67362
Issue 1: The ValidateBindingBehavior is not doing anything. I suspect it's not finding the controller or matching the rules since the property name is not easily visible in the binding (due to dynamic controls).
Issue 2: For some reason validate() on submit actually only shows the first error instead of all of them. That indicates a problem but I don't know what.
Can anyone get the attached GistRun to work properly?
I have an elm app designed with the Elm Architecture in mind. I've used it for all the samples in the tutorial and they work fine. I have the following components
ContainerListView
ContainerView
AddressView
RegistrationView
...
The ContainerView component is a very formatted div structure that is used to contain other views (but for now, only 1 at a time)
ContainerListView can contain multiple containerViews. It handles their presentation and positioning. You can think of it as an MDI surface
A menu from the main ui is used to add new container views to the container view list.
I'm presented with with three main questions. Two of them are
How do I create the components such that Container view can contain any other element is I pass in for example the init, update, and view functions and expect all things to be wired correctly? At the moment, the samle views I have are kinda hard-coded. They know exactly who the children is.
Some of the components require access to things like url, access token, etc. Does this always have to be passed in from main to the individual components or it can come from another source which will essentially be readonly and maybe updatable only from main?
I'm not sure if these two should be individual questions on their own. Any information on how to architect larger apps beyound hello world will also be appreciated.
I'm working on something similar! Nested controls. I too have a container object which knows about all the types that it can handle, and has basically case statements to handle each type. So I can't drop in a new control type and expect it to handle it, that requires altering the container.
As far as I know elm doesn't have type classes, which would be how I might try to handle that kind of abstraction in haskell or purescript. There's more about that here:
https://github.com/elm-lang/elm-compiler/issues/38
and here:
https://github.com/elm-lang/elm-compiler/issues/1039
The upshot appears to be that they don't know how they want to solve that problem yet, so they haven't.
I am using mark t hughes view picklist custom control from open NTF.
Link to control on openNTF
I have set all the paramenters etc, however when I load the page with the control on, I get my custom error page, and the error below in my error logging database
Error on dialog1button5999 null property/event:
1:
Script interpreter error, line=1, col=35: [ReferenceError]
'compositeData' not found
compositeData.picklistButtonClass + " domfindmebutton5999"
This is trying to set the styleClass of a button in the custom control here:
<xp:this.styleClass><![CDATA[#{javascript:compositeData.picklistButtonClass + " domfindmebutton5999"}]]></xp:this.styleClass>
I am also definately passing this parameter is with the default code:
picklistButtonClass="button2"
I also followed the video Here to the letter, and still get exactly the same issue.
Has anyone come across this before or have any pointers as to where I should be looking to resolve it? Im not sure where to start, as all the instructions and video's explain how to complete the custom properties of the control, but there is never any mention of a need to actually modify any code WITHIN the custom control....
Thanks
(as a side note, I am using bootstrap, should this make any difference)
This is because of the theme definition. Look at the Mark Leusink's blog entry here. http://linqed.eu/2014/08/28/xpages-gotcha-modeconcat-in-your-themes/
If a theme has a "concat" definition, that will be computed at a very early phase. To concat values, it needs to compute the initial value. However, in some cases (e.g. Repeat, Custom control, etc.), the initial value cannot be computed at the page-load section.
For such cases, you can override the theme with a special themeId, as Mark suggested.
I have an MVC/angularJS page with a button, the button needs to call code to process the current page and proceed to the next step in the application, but they want the button text to be a/b testable with different variations. I'm new to Sitecore so am struggling to know the best way of doing things.
I thought of having a simple text component/template which just has a single line text property, but if I add that to the page template then it doesn't seem a/b testable because when you click on the test option it asks you to select content. Whereas the content was text they entered as part of the page template.
The only way I know of making a/b testable content so that they can click on the page in page editor and choose to select content / add test variation. I wouldn't add the button to the placeholder as it needs to call specific angular code and always be there, but should I be adding a placeholder where the text is? It seems like overkill to have to define a placeholder there, define a rendering, create a partial view, define placeholder settings to limit it to the simple text component, and then hope they don't try adding multiple items to the placeholder.
I would make a separate template (ie with the text field for your button) to represent your form, then either create the two test variation items as children of your page, or maybe place them in a shared components folder outside of your 'home' node.
EDIT
In order to move your form component into a new A/B testable component you would need to create a new Sublayout in Sitecore, then create a new ascx control for the sublayout. In the Page_Load handler of this control, you would use the following code to retrieve the datasource of the sublayout:
//assume you have a button on your usercontrol called btnSubmit
//assume your template has a single-line text field called 'SubmitButtonText'
Guid dataSourceId;
Sitecore.Data.Items.Item dataSource;
if (Guid.TryParse(sublayout.DataSource, out dataSourceId))
{
dataSource = Sitecore.Context.Database.GetItem(new ID(dataSourceId));
btnSubmit.Text = dataSource["SubmitButtonText"];
}
So I created a new template which just had a single line of text as a field, and added a content item in a shared data node.
In my partial view:
#model Digital.Models.SimpleTextItem
<button ....>
<span class="hidden-xs">#Model.SimpleText_Value<br></span>
</button>
In my main page - I was trying to statically bind it so that they could only change content rather than add new controls to the placeholder, but that only worked if I specified the datasource in this page.
Using a rendering, and in the page layout adding the rendering to the placeholder with a specified data source:
#Html.Sitecore().Placeholder("PremiumQuoteApplyNowPlaceHolder")
Not sure if it was the best approach but it achieves what I need it to.
A/B testing could be applied only to controls(XSLT renderings, sublayouts, action controller renderings, view renderings). If you want to make A/B testing only for button then you should create additional control for it as you did.
Technical details for MVC: A/B testing is applied on mvc.customizeRendering pipeline where rendering arguments are processed. This pipeline operates on renderings level. It means that you are not able to create A/B testing for particular field(button) without your own customization.