28. April 2010 14:40
I was reading an article on Google's use of hash-bang in order to provide a consistent means of Ajaxy content for crawling/display. There are three points to resolve here. 1. Handling those cases where someone posts an ajaxy url, with the hash endpoint to facebook or twitter so that the search engines have a convention to handle these types of urls. 2. Being able to deal with the Ajaxy endpoint, the original content and the ajax callback content. 3. Being able to deal with those browsers that don't have scripting.
It got me thinking, how would one could work with progressive URL's via MVC and a few thoughts occurred to me. First, if the controller name is always the first portion of the url from the application base, if the MVC routing engine could simply replace the
?_escaped_fragment_= portion of the uri to be equal to the original route. For example
http://mysite/controller/action/1?_escaped_fragment_=/otheraction/2 would be equivalent to
http://mysite/controller/otheraction/2 on the backend. Second, How difficult would it be for the default view engine to be transposed in the instances of an expected response type give html, vs js. Similar to how WCF over http handles JSON via the same endpoints as XML. I know this has been discussed in the past.
Where this leads me, is thinking it might be nice to have an ASP.Net MVC 2 based framework, with conventions for handling these scenarios as a default. I like ASP.Net MVC quite a bit, and have followed Castle and Fubu as well. I'm merely thinking that it would be nice if there were a default starter kit towards creating a browser and search engine friendly Ajaxy application. It really isn't easy. I think that the google hash-bang solution leaves out the people that don't have scripting enabled, getting a hash-bang endpoint is near worthless, save for a
<noscript>script disabled indexable links here</noscript>. And progressive enhancement (aka Hijax) techniques don't allow for a browser engine to properly index copy/pasted urls. Having some level of convention to support both is necessary. I think it's equally necessary for google to post the
_escaped_fragment_ based urls in the search results for those users who have scripting disabled.
29. June 2009 15:39
Okay, so you have a bunch of script references, some added via your master template, others in your views. You'd also like to be able to handle script adds in your partial views. The problem is, you don't want your views, and partial views to know about the implementation details. What I am going to do, is outline my solution for adding needed scripts into a given view/output without having duplicate script tags, and allowing each master, view, and partial to call for all the scripts it will need. More...
13. November 2008 14:55
Okay, I lied. I really wanted to figure out how to get theming to work the way I wanted. As you can see to the right, I created a "Theme" folder, where I have a "Default" and in this case a "Red" theme. Under the theme's folder, I moved the Content, and Views folders. My goal was to allow for a fallback to using a View from the Default theme, but still allow for the appropriate masterpage to be applied from the theme's folder if one existed. In this case, you can see that there is an Index view for the Home controller within the Default theme, but there is no matching view in the Red theme. More...
11. November 2008 22:14
My goal is to create a personal website application that implements the features needed, and wanted for someone who wants to create a personal site that extends beyond just a blogging engine. I've been wanting to work with ASP.Net MVC and some other technologies, so I'll be focusing on using them in MySite. More...