I have an MFC ActiveX control embedded in a web page. Some of the parameters for this control are very large. I don't know what these values will be at compile time, but I do know that once retrieved, they will almost certainly never change.
Currently, I embed the parameters like so:
<object name="MyActiveX">
<param name="param" value="<%= GetData() %>" />
</object>
I want to do something like this:
<object name="MyActiveX">
<param name="param" value="content/data" valuetype="ref" />
</object>
The idea is that the browser would retrieve the resource from the web server and pass it on to the control. The browser's own caching would then take care of the unneccesary downloads. Unfortunately, ref parameters don't work like this. The browser just passes the url along to the control (which strikes me as utterly useless, but I digress).
So, is there some way I can make this work? Alternatively, is there an easy way in MFC to instruct the control's host container to retrieve a URI identified resource? Any better ideas?
Implement the IPersistStream or IPersistStreamInit interface then you can specify content with the object's data attribute as in: <object clsid="XXXX" data="mydata.bin"></object>. Internet Explorer will download the file referenced by the data attribute hand it to you via its IPersistStream::Load interface. ATL has default implementations for these interfaces which will populate your control's properties, almost certainly so does MFC.
Does it really need the data when it is created?
Could you make it an 'init' step
largeData = GetData();
MyActiveX.init( largeData );
Related
I've converted my app to use NavigationUI. But setupWithNavController() replaces my setNavigationItemSelectedListener().
In my listener I was passing a (type safe) argument to the fragment.
If I understand your question correct what you are looking for is:
Navigation parameters documentation
Briefly:
In your navigation graph, on the fragment you want the value sent to, you will add an argument.
<fragment android:id="#+id/myFragment" >
<argument
android:name="amount"
app:argType="integer"
android:defaultValue="0" />
</fragment>
When you then reference that fragment as an action, the library will generate a Directories class, which will look something like this:
val action = SpecifyAmountFragmentDirections.confirmationAction(amount)
v.findNavController().navigate(action)
The names are generated based upon what you named the Fragment and actions.
Also note that it is possible to send whole objects if they are Parcelable as well.
If the Fragment in question is the startDestination of your graph I am not sure if you can do it right away. A work around might be to load the data in the Fragment? Or maybe into a shared ViewModel from the Activity?
Good luck!
If anyone is still looking for an answer to this question. I've found a usefull workaround with the NavigationUI Global actions (working with alpha-09)
You can provide a top level action to your navigation graph:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<navigation xmlns:app="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res-auto"
xmlns:tools="http://schemas.android.com/tools"
xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android"
android:id="#+id/main_nav"
app:startDestination="#id/mainFragment">
...
<action android:id="#+id/action_global_mainFragment"
app:destination="#id/mainFragment"/>
</navigation>
And use it with your navigation controller to navigate with the correct bundle when a user click on a menu item. Be carefull to remove .setupWithNavController(navController) call from your NavigationView, or it will override your behavior.
when we implement SitecoreApiController, for each action method we make using Sitecore.Services.Core.ServicesController("namespace") attribute, we get a url like this:
/sitecore/api/ssc/{namespace}/{controller}/{id}/{action}
I wonder if we could change this default pattern, somehow in config files. I particularly interested in /sitecore/api/ part, because sometimes in the sense of security concerns, certain clients don't like to reveal that much about CMS platform behind the scene. Sometimes they even ask us to hide anything in HTTP header that tells about Microsoft ASP.NET explicitly.
Is this possible here?
Edit
this link shows a way to customize it using pipelines but I wonder if we could change the base url just through config files without needing a custom pipeline
I had a look at it, and I think I found out how - although I haven't tested it.
It looks for a setting named Sitecore.Services.RouteBase and if it can't find it, it uses sitecore/api/ssc/ as the default value.
You should be able to change it with a config patch like this in the App_Config/Include folder:
<configuration xmlns:patch="http://www.sitecore.net/xmlconfig/">
<sitecore>
<settings>
<setting name="Sitecore.Services.RouteBase" value="custom/api/" />
</settings>
</sitecore>
</configuration>
How I can call webservice from voice xml (vxml) document. I am using an opensource IVR project and I need to run a webservice for any given option from within the vxml document.
This is similar to this query;
how can I call a webservice from voiceXML?
However, solution is provided there but it is not
You cannot call a web service directly from a VoiceXML application. There are generally two approaches for getting data into a VoiceXML application:
Use the data element tag to make an http request. The result must be XML. You will need to parse the result with the provided DOM functions. Note, some browsers have extended features to facilitate XML parsing. This also requires a VoiceXML 2.1 compliant browser.
Transfer control to a dynamic bit of server code that returns VXML to be processed populating your desired variables. This can be done with a goto element or subdialog element.
Your question is incomplete, but I suspect I know what's bothering you.
I get information from a webservice by using
<data name="return_data" srcexpr="some_url" method="post" namelist="var1 var2 var3" />
The data I get back is inside the return_data variable. In my case, the data are in XML format, and I use JavaScript functions to extract the data I need.
As an aside, for maintainability, re-usability, and ease of reading, I personally find it useful to create separate files for the JS functions and include them via <script> into my root VoiceXML document.
I am trying to design an endpoint template for a web service. My main requirement is that the caller is able to specify which properties should be populated in the returned result set.
My service returns large lists (up to 1M records) of partial objects as well as individual full objects such as (rough example XML, sorry it's a little verbose)
List:
<items>
<item>
<a>aaa</a>
<b>bbb</b>
</item>
<item>
<a>aaaA</a>
<b>bbbB</b>
</item>
</items>
Detail:
<item>
<a>aaa</a>
<b>bbb</b>
<c>ccc</c>
...
<w>
<x>xxx</x>
<y>yyy</y>
</w>
<z>zzz</z>
</item>
I have considered the following ideas:
Returning the full detail items in the list
Creating a 'list' item type that is shorter
passing a string array of property names that the caller wants to be returned
I am leaning towards the 3rd option but I want something different to that it doesn't support sub objects, I have considered passing the xml schema that you want returned instead of an array.
I would like the API to support lazy loading which is why the 3rd way seems viable as well.
Here's an example of what a function for 3. would look like:
public User GetUser(long ID, string[] properties)
And then the caller could just go:
User.Email = GetUser(User.ID, "Email").Email
Through extensive use of default values and hiding nulls, the returned XML for that would be:
<User>
<ID>123</ID>
<Email>example#example.com</Email>
</User>
Now the problem as mentioned above is trying to make it play nice with things like <w> far above, which itself has sub items as well as the possibility for lists to have sub items.
As I have far too many properties, I cannot have just a ws method for each property.
I am considering option 3. but using an xml schema instead of a string[].. But I can't think of an easy way to define this, I would also like to not have to use String names for properties such as "Email".
The final plan is to have a series of pre-defined schemas that are used commonly and only in advanced cases would we need to actually define the requested properties. But I have no idea of all the systems that will be talking to my API, let alone what properties they might each want (it's not going to be feasible for us to tailor the API for every caller).
Or am I over complicating everything too much?
I found the documentation for the Google APIs on Partial Responses and Partial Updates:
http://googlecode.blogspot.com/2011/07/lightning-fast-performance-tips-for.html
This seems to answer my question.
In my C++ app I'm embedding (via COM) a web browser (Internet Explorer) control (CLSID_WebBrowser).
I can display my own html in that control by using IHTMLDocument2::write() method but if the html has <img src="foo.png"> element, it's not displayed.
I assume there is a way for me to provide the data for foo.png somehow to the web control, but I can't find the right place to hook this functionality?
I need to be in full control of providing the content of foo.png, so work-arounds like using res:// protocol or saving to disk and using file:// protocol are not good enough. I just want to plug my code somehow so that when embedded CLSID_WebBrowser control sees <img src="foo.png"> in html data given with IHTMLDocument2::write() it will ask me to provide this data.
To answer my own question, the solution that finally worked for me is:
register custom IInternetProtocol/IInternetProtocolInfo/ via custom IClassFactory given to IInternetSession::RegisterNameSpace(). For reasons that seem like a bug to me, it has to be a protocol already known to IE (I've chosen "its") even though it would be much better if it was my own, unique namespace.
feed html data via custom IMoniker through IPersistentMoniker::Load() and make sure that IMoniker::GetDisplayName() (which is a base url according to which relative links in provided html will be resolved) starts with that protocol scheme (in my case "its://"). That way relative link "foo.png" in the html data will be its://foo.png to IE which will make urlmon call IInternetProtocol::Start() and IInternetProtocol::Read() to ask for the data for that url.
This is all rather complicated, you can look at the actual (BSD-licensed) code here:
http://code.google.com/p/sumatrapdf/source/browse/trunk/src/utils/HtmlWindow.cpp
You can embed a small webserver such as mongoose and reference those impage from there.
In mongoose, you can attach callback to specific path, thus returning images from C++ code.
We use this for our debugging tools, where each images is accessible from a web interface
The easiest solution would be a Data URI. You'd inline out the image directly with IHTMLDocument2::write().