Trying to figure out the best way to accomplish this. I have inhereted a Django project that is pretty well done.
There are a number of pre coded modules that a user can include in a page's (a page and a module are models in this app) left well in the admin (ie: side links, ads, constant contact).
A new requirement involves inserting a module of internal links in the same well. These links are not associated with a page in the same way the other modules, they are a seperate many to many join - ie one link can be reused in a set across all the pages.
the template pseudo code is:
if page has modules:
loop through modules:
write the pre coded content of module
Since the links need to be in the same well as the modules, I have created a "link placeholder module" with a slug of link-placeholder.
The new pseudo code is:
if page has modules:
loop through modules:
if module.slug is "link-placeholder":
loop through page.links and output each
else:
write pre-coded module
My question is where is the best place to write this output for the links? As I see it, my options are:
Build the out put in the template (easy, but kind of gets messy - code is nice and neat now)
Build a function in the page model that is called when the "link placeholder is encountered) page.get_internal_link_ouutput. Essentially this would query, build and print internal link module output.
Do the same thing with a custom template tag.
I am leaning towards 2 or 3, but it doesn't seem like the right place to do it. I guess I sometimes get a little confused about the best place to put code in django apps, though I do really like the framework.
Thanks in advance for any advice.
I'd recommend using a custom template tag.
Writing the code directly into the template is not the right place for that much logic, and I don't believe a model should have template-specific methods added to it. Better to have template-specific logic live in template-specific classes and functions (e.g. template tags).
Related
Tailwind offers a feature where you can give an input element the peer class and then, in a sibling element use the peer-invalid: pseudoclass to apply conditional stylings. This is commonly used to provide helper text when a form field is not valid.
I don't see how this can be tested in JS-DOM though, as JS-DOM doesn't have access to the actual CSS when it is just rendering components in unit tests.
The information I have seen about getting JS-DOM to use CSS at all is kinda sketchy, so I was wondering if it's even worth trying to get it to evaluate a bunch of tailwind classes in a NextJS/Jest/RTL project. I'm using Tailwind 3 so it's not even like I have a big file full of generated classes I could try and pass to JS-DOM :/
So can it be done? (Note the hard fact please mods!!!)
(And, somewhat more subjectively, should it be done? Or is there a better way to approach this?)
I created a site with several lists and several CSR renderers for those lists. I applied the renderers to the forms via JSLink. Then I tried to save the site as template and create another one from this tempalte. All the JS links are now broken and lead nowhere.
Here is one of the JSLinks from the initial site:
<JSLink xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/WebPart/v2/ListForm">~Site/SiteAssets/FormsManagement/Js/utils.js|~Site/SiteAssets/FormsManagement/Js/paymentsFormRenderer.js</JSLink>
</WebPart>
And here is what it changed to after the template creation:
<JSLink xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/WebPart/v2/ListForm">/sites/home/test-subsite/SiteAssets/FormsManagement/Js/utils.js|/sites/home/test-subsite/SiteAssets/FormsManagement/Js/paymentsFormRenderer.js</JSLink>
These changes break all my CSR and I have no idea how to fix it. I am aware that these two links have to be equivalent, although on the recreated subsite, browser tries to load the javascript from a domain of cdn.sharepointonline.com which is wrong. (I suspect this is due to wrong relative addressing).
All the help is much appreciated! Thanks in advance.
So I figured it out. I am not sure what the problem was but I found the workaround that seems to work pretty good.
I scraped entirely the idea to use JSLink and instead I used <SharePoint:ScriptLink> tag and included the scripts that way. I wrapped my scripts so that they use ExecuteOrDelayUntilScriptLoaded([Script's closure here], 'clientForms.js');
This seems to yield the same result as using JSLink, but the tokens in JSLink are not expanded to relative urls and links are not broken. The only downside is that no one is able to modify the scripts without the Sharepoint Designer as they are no more listed in JSLink field.
We're new to Ember, and our intended (ember-cli) app first works by opening a project (which we can think of a JSON object), and then acting on various sections of that project with various functions. We have this "pick your project first" approach neatly encapsulated in a Django REST api structure, e.g.
/projects/ lists all projects
/projects/1/ gives information about project 1
/projects/1/sectionA/ list all elements in sectionA of project 1
/projects/1/sectionA/2/ gives information about element 2 of sectionA in project 1
/projects/1/sectionA/2/sectionB/... and so on.
We made relatively good progress with the first two points in Ember using ember-data and this.store('project').find(...) etc. However, we've come unstuck trying to add further to our url (e.g. points 3., 4., and 5.). I believe our issues come from routing and handling multiple models (e.g. project and sectionA).
The question: what is the best way to structure the routes in Ember.js to match a non-trivial REST API, and use ember-data similarly?
Comments:
the "Ember way", and stuff working out of the box is preferred. Custom adapters and .getJSON might work, but we're not sure if we'll then lose out on what Ember offers.
we want the choice of project to affect the main app template. E.g. if a project does not have "sectionA", then a link to "sectionA" is not displayed in the main app. And, if the project does have "sectionA", we need the link to be to e.g. "/project/1/sectionA", i.e. dependant on the project open.
This seems similar to handling users (i.e. first I must "pick a user" and then continue), where the problem is solved outside of the URL (and is similar to using sessions as we have done in the past). However, we specifically want the project ID to be inside the URL, to remain stateless.
Bonus questions (if relevant):
how would we structure the models? Do we need to use hasMany/belongsTo and, if so, is this equivalent to just loading the whole project JSON in the first place?
can ember-data handle such complex requests? I.e. "give me item 2 from sectionA of project 1"? Can it do this "in one go", or do there have to be nested queries (i.e. "first give me project 1" and then from this "give me sectionA" and then from this "give me item 1")?
Finally, apologies if this is documented well somewhere. We've spent nearly a week trying to figure this out and have tried our best to find resources -- it's possible we just don't know what we're looking for.
I think this one will be a good thing to read: discuss.emberjs.com/t/… - you've got Tom Dale and Stefan Penner involved in the thread
My suggestion would be to change it to query params:
/projects?id=1&selectionA=a&selectionB=b
then, you won't have such problems. And yes, you can still use all the hasMany and belongsTo fields.
If there's anything unclear, I'll provide you with a longer answer (if I'm able to).
Check out ember-api-actions and ember-data-actions also ember-data-url-templates
Here's a few more resources from a blog I found. ember-data-working-with-custom-api-endpoints and ember-data-working-with-nested-api-resources
I am currently in the process of writing a custom DataProvider. Using the Intergrate External Data documentation.
I've managed to show the external data in the Sitecore back end. However whenever I try to view the data in the items I created, I am getting an error
Null ids are not allowed. <br> Parameter name: displayName
There seems to be precious little on the subject on how to create a custom DataProvider on the Sitecore Developer Network.
The example on their website seems to only show how to import a SINGLE item into a static database. However I am simply trying to merge some items into the hierarchy and I can't find any useful documentation.
It seems that one of your methods that should return an ID doesn't. It might be GetChildIds and/or GetParentId.
Nick Wesselman wrote a good article about it gathering all the information including an example on the Marketplace. I think that is your best start. You can read it here.
Turns out I needed to include at the very least, the Fields->Section->Template in the GetParent method. To be on the safe side I included the Fields/Sections/Templates into my implementations of
GetChildIDs
GetItemDefinition
GetParentID
It wasn't obvious that this was the case, since I had in fact implemented the GetTemplates method correctly, and I had expected that should be enough.
I know that in django integration, it is easy to test if a page would load successfully by making sure status code is 200. However, the project I am working on have pages that might partially load (certain sections of the page will silently fail to load). What is the best way to catch this situation? Is there a way to insert such error into the http response?
I know I can potentially do regex on the text on the page to check for things that might not load or I can probably check that name of certain css class exist. But that does not seem to be too robust an approach.
This will greatly depend on your implementation details, but there are two suitable approaches to testing templates that may help you:
If the partial page loading can be tested/triggered by using nothing more than template syntax, create test templates that conditionally print some text you can match against in the response, such as WORKED or FOO.
If it's something that largely depends upon the context the template receives, then one-off test views, which you define alongside your test case and call directly by passing in a mocked request, work as well. In this case, you'll likely rely on the test view to raise exceptions if the page rendering won't proceed as expected, otherwise everything went well.
Alternatively, you can even mix the two. In this case, you'll rely on the view to generate a HTTP response which you'll then check for some test text.
If that doesn't work, you can resort to overriding the templates. The general problem is that you can't rely on matching against text because it's global. The template can change and potentially cause your tests to misfire. What you can then do is have specific test settings that add additional directories for template discovery where you can provide different template implementations which contain text that does not change which would be suitable and safe for matching against in the test. The difficulty with this approach is that it does not neatly document itself, as opposed to the previous two approaches.