Going from this article here what i am looking to do is to get the key value pairs sent by an aspnet/html form and then put them into a dto that i can then use elsewhere in my application. I see that inside the foreach loop
public async Task<HttpResponseMessage> PostFormData()
{
if (!Request.Content.IsMimeMultipartContent())
{
throw new HttpResponseException(HttpStatusCode.UnsupportedMediaType);
}
string root = HttpContext.Current.Server.MapPath("~/App_Data");
var provider = new MultipartFormDataStreamProvider(root);
try
{
await Request.Content.ReadAsMultipartAsync(provider);
// Show all the key-value pairs.
foreach (var key in provider.FormData.AllKeys)
{
foreach (var val in provider.FormData.GetValues(key))
{
Trace.WriteLine(string.Format("{0}: {1}", key, val));
}
}
you can read the values and send them to traceline. From there how would you go about turning them into a dto?
to go along with the example in the link. i want to get
public class trip{
public string triptype {get; set;}
public string airports{get; set;}
DateTime? dates {get; set;}
}
I see you've found a way round it now, but a simpler approach would be as follows, using the default model binding functionality built into Web API.
public async Task<HttpResponseMessage> PostFormData(Trip tr)
{
//do whatever you want here, you've already got a Trip object fully-formed (assuming the data is valid - the first thing you do you should be to check that):
if (!ModelState.IsValid) {
//return an error to the client
return Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest, ModelState);
}
//otherwise, carry on and do whatever processing you need
///...
//last thing to do, return a response, something like:
return Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.OK, "Your request has been processed");
}
For this to work, the only requirement is that the names of the properties of the "Trip" object match those being submitted from your form. Judging by the property names you've given in your answer, you'd just need to modify your Trip object very slightly:
public class Trip {
public string trip { get; set; }
public string options { get; set; }
public string seat { get; set; }
}
If you don't want to do that, then do the opposite: modify the "name" attributes of the HTML form you're submitting from, so that they match the Trip object's property names.
And that's it - no need to manually populate the object properties from the form data.
If anyone is interested in how to do this the way i found that worked for me was this. I dont know if this is the best way. I do know that since receiving values like this is not normally used commonly the answer was not clear.
var tr = new Trip
{
Triptype = provider.FormData.GetValues("trip").FirstOrDefault(),
Options = provider.FormData.GetValues("options").FirstOrDefault(),
Seat = provider.FormData.GetValues("seat").FirstOrDefault(),
};
Related
It might be a noob question or an architectural misunderstanding, but I ask it anyhow because I am out of ideas and search terms: The goal is to implement a controller CountriesController() which is supposed to concatenate the (JSONish) results of two endpoints.
Assume I have two endpoints api/allowedCountriesToSell and api/allowedCountriesToBuy which are implemented as CountriesSellController() and CountriesBuyController() respectively. Both of them give back data as JSON which I want to merge and offer as a new endpoint. I am aware that this architecture is not ideal, but I am not allowed to do it architecturally different. Furthermore, I actually have to POST two different files to those endpoints - both existing controllers contain something like
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult FileUpload(HttpPostedFileBase file, string selectBox)
{ // ...
My new endpoint compiles all these two required parameters, let's call them myFileX, and mySelectBox. Here what I have have so far:
var myOtherContoller1 = new CountriesSellController();
var list1 = myOtherContoller1.FileUpload(myFile1,mySelectBox);
var myOtherContoller2 = new CountriesSellController();
var list2 = myOtherContoller1.FileUpload(myFile2,mySelectBox);
my result = list1.asEnumerable().Concat(list2.asEnumerable()); // Pseudocode. Here I am lost.
return Ok(result);
The problem is that both list1 and list2 are of type IHttpActionResult and I am not sure how to extract the data inside that. Ideally, result would be of type IEnumerable<UploadStatusDto> where I define the respective data transfer object as
namespace API.Models
{
public class UploadStatusDto
{
public int UploadId { get; set; } // contained in the response of both controllers
public string FileName { get; set; } // myFileX - parameter for calling the 2 existing controllers
public int UploadStatus { get; set; } // coming back within listX
public int Type { get; set; } // whether it is a buy or a sell, i.e. which controller I called
}
Any guidance is appreciated.
You need to do something line this.
var response = await myOtherContoller1.FileUpload(myFile2,mySelectBox).ExecuteAsync();
This will return HttpResponseMessage and you can get the content from it
You can get your content like this: Getting content/message from HttpResponseMessage.
My suggestion though, would be to extract the logic of your other controllers to a service class, and call both in this and the other two, the logic that is now in the original controllers.
I have a simple scenario using the Entity Framework in C#. I have an Entity Post:
public class Post
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
}
In my PostManager I have these methods:
public int AddPost(string name, string description)
{
var post = new Post() { Name = name, Description = description };
using (var db = new DbContext())
{
var res = db.Posts.Add(post);
res.Validate();
db.SaveChanges();
return res.Id;
}
}
public void UpdatePost(int postId, string newName, string newDescription)
{
using (var db = new DbContext())
{
var data = (from post in db.Posts.AsEnumerable()
where post.Id == postId
select post).FirstOrDefault();
data.Name = newName;
data.Description = newDescription;
data.Validate();
db.SaveChanges();
}
}
The method validate() refers to class:
public static class Validator
{
public static void Validate(this Post post)
{
if ( // some control)
throw new someException();
}
I call the validate method before the savechanges() but after adding the object to the context. What's the best practice to validate data in this simple scenario? It's better validate the arguments instead? What's happen to object post if the validate method throw exception after adding the object to the context?
UPDATE:
I have to throw a custom set of exception depending on data validation error.
I strongly recommend you to (if at all possible) to modify your entity so the setters are private (don't worry, EF can still set them on proxy creation), mark the default constructor as protected (EF can still do lazy loading/proxy creation), and make the only public constructors available check the arguments.
This has several benefits:
You limit the number of places where the state of an entity can be changed, leading to less duplication
You protect your class' invariants. By forcing creation of an entity to go via a constructor, you ensure that it is IMPOSSIBLE for an object of your entity to exist in an invalid or unknown state.
You get higher cohesion. By putting the constraints on data closer to the data itself, it becomes easier to understand and reason about your classes.
You code becomes self-documenting to a higher degree. One never has to wonder "is it OK if I set a negative value on this int property?" if it is impossible to even do it in the first place.
Separation of concerns. Your manager shouldn't know how to validate an entity, this just leads to high coupling. I've seen many managers grow into unmaintainable monsters because they simply do everything. Persisting, loading, validation, error handling, conversion, mapping etc. This is basically the polar opposite of SOLID OOP.
I know it is really popular nowadays to just make all "models" into stupid property bags with getters and setters and only a default constructor because (bad) ORMs have forced us to do this, but this is no longer the case, and there are so many issues with this imo.
Code example:
public class Post
{
protected Post() // this constructor is only for EF proxy creation
{
}
public Post(string name, string description)
{
if (/* validation check, inline or delegate */)
throw new ArgumentException();
Name = name;
Description = description;
}
public int Id { get; private set; }
public string Name { get; private set; }
public string Description { get; private set; }
}
Then your PostManager code becomes trivial:
using (var db = new DbContext())
{
var post = new Post(name, description); // possibly try-catch here
db.Posts.Add(post);
db.SaveChanges();
return post.Id;
}
If the creation/validation logic is extremely intricate this pattern lends itself very well for refactoring to a factory taking care of the creation.
I would also note that encapsulating data in entities exposing a minimal state-changing API leads to classes that are several orders of magnitude easier to test in isolation, if you care at all about that sort of thing.
As I mentioned in the comments above, you might want to check out .NET System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations namespace.
Data Annotations (DA) allows you to specify attributes on properties to describe what values are acceptable. It's important to know that DA is completely independent of databases and ORM APIs such as Entity Framework so classes decorated with DA attributes can be used in any tier of your system whether it be the data tier; WCF; ASP.NET MVC or WPF.
In the example below, I define a Muppet class with a series of properties.
Name is required and has a max length of 50.
Scaryness takes an int but it must be in the range of {0...100}.
Email is decorated with an imaginary custom validator for validating strings that should contain an e-mail.
Example:
public class Muppet
{
[Required]
[StringLength(50)]
public string Name {get; set;}
public Color Color {get; set; }
[Range(0,100)]
public int Scaryness {get; set; }
[MyCustomEmailValidator]
public string Email {get;set; }
}
In my project I have to throw customException when i validate the data. It's possible do it using Data Annotations?
Yes you can. To validate this object at any time of your application (regardless of whether it has reached EF or not) just perform this:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations;
using System.Linq;
.
.
.
Post post = ... // fill it in
Validator.Validate(post);
public static class Validator
{
public static void Validate(this Post post)
{
// uses the extension method GetValidationErrors defined below
if (post.GetValidationErrors().Any())
{
throw new MyCustomException();
}
}
}
public static class ValidationHelpers
{
public static IEnumerable<ValidationResult> GetValidationErrors(this object obj)
{
var validationResults = new List<ValidationResult>();
var context = new ValidationContext(obj, null, null);
Validator.TryValidateObject(obj, context, validationResults, true);
return validationResults;
}
.
.
.
If you want to get the validation error messages you could use this method:
/// <summary>
/// Gets the validation error messages for column.
/// </summary>
/// <param name="obj">The object.</param>
/// <returns></returns>
public static string GetValidationErrorMessages(this object obj)
{
var error = "";
var errors = obj.GetValidationErrors();
var validationResults = errors as ValidationResult[] ?? errors.ToArray();
if (!validationResults.Any())
{
return error;
}
foreach (var ee in validationResults)
{
foreach (var n in ee.MemberNames)
{
error += ee + "; ";
}
}
return error;
}
The free set of steak knives is that the validation attributes will be detected once the object reaches EF where it will be validated there as well in case you forget or the object is changed since.
I think you should be working with Data Annotation as #Micky says above. Your current approach is validating manually after it has been added.
using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations;
// Your class
public class Post
{
[Required]
public int Id { get; set; }
[Required,MaxLength(50)]
public string Name { get; set; }
[Required,MinLength(15),MyCustomCheck] // << Here is your custom validator
public string Description { get; set; }
}
// Your factory methods
public class MyFactory() {
public bool AddPost() {
var post = new Post() { Id = 1, Name = null, Description = "This is my test post"};
try {
using (var db = new DbContext()) {
db.Posts.Add(post);
db.SaveChanges();
return true;
}
} catch(System.Data.Entity.Validation.DbEntityValidationException e) {
Console.WriteLine("Something went wrong....");
} catch(MyCustomException e) {
Console.WriteLine(" a Custom Exception was triggered from a custom data annotation...");
}
return false;
}
}
// The custom attribute
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property | AttributeTargets.Field, AllowMultiple = false)]
sealed public class MyCustomCheckAttribute : ValidationAttribute
{
public override bool IsValid(object value)
{
if (value instanceof string) {
throw new MyCustomException("The custom exception was just triggered....")
} else {
return true;
}
}
}
// Your custom exception
public class MyCustomException : Exception() {}
See also:
DbEntityValidationException class: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.data.entity.validation.dbentityvalidationexception(v=vs.113).aspx
Default data annotations
http://www.entityframeworktutorial.net/code-first/dataannotation-in-code-first.aspx
Building your custom data annotations (validators):
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc668224.aspx
I always use two validations:
client side - using jQuery Unobtrusive Validation in combination with Data Annotations
server side validation - and here it depends on application - validation is performed in controller actions or deeper in business logic. Nice place to do it is to override OnSave method in your context and do it there
Remember that you can write custom Data Annotation attributes which can validate whatever you need.
You can modify the code in this way:
public int AddPost(string name, string description)
{
var post = new Post() { Name = name, Description = description };
if(res.Validate())
{
using (var db = new DbContext())
{
var res = db.Posts.Add(post);
db.SaveChanges();
return res.Id;
}
}
else
return -1; //if not success
}
public static bool Validate(this Post post)
{
bool isValid=false;
//validate post and change isValid to true if success
if(isvalid)
return true;
}
else
return false;
}
After adding data to DbContext and before calling SaveChanges() you can call GetValidationErrors() method of DbContext and check its count to quiqckly check if there are any errors. You can further enumerate all of errors and get error details against each of them. I have bundled Error conversion from ICollection to string in GetValidationErrorsString() extension method.
if (db.GetValidationErrors().Count() > 0)
{
var errorString = db.GetValidationErrorsString();
}
public static string GetValidationErrorsString(this DbContext dbContext)
{
var validationErrors = dbContext.GetValidationErrors();
string errorString = string.Empty;
foreach (var error in validationErrors)
{
foreach (var innerError in error.ValidationErrors)
{
errorString += string.Format("Property: {0}, Error: {1}<br/>", innerError.PropertyName, innerError.ErrorMessage);
}
}
return errorString;
}
<TL;DR>
At a minimum, I'm looking for a way to conditionally exclude certain properties on the resource from being included in the response on a per-call basis (See fields below).
Ideally, I'd like to implement a REST service with ServiceStack that supports all the major points below.
UPDATE
While I really like ServiceStack's approach in general and would prefer to use it if possible, if it isn't particularly well suited towards these ideas I'd rather not bend over backwards bastardizing it to make it work. If that's the case, can anyone point to another c# framework that might be more appropriate? I'm actively exploring other options myself, of course.
</TD;DR>
In this talk entitled Designing REST + JSON APIs, the presenter describes his strategy for Resource References (via href property on resources) in JSON. In addition to this, he describes two query parameters (fields and expand) for controlling what data is included the response of a call to a REST service. I've been trying without success to dig into the ServiceStack framework to achieve support for fields in particular but have thus far been unsuccessful. Is this currently possible in ServiceStack? Ideally the solution would be format agnostic and would therefore work across all of ServiceStack's supported output formats. I would imagine expand would follow the same strategy.
I'll describe these features here but I think the talk at the link does a better job of explaining them.
Lets say we have an Profiles resource with the following properties: givenName, surname, gender, and favColor. The Profiles resource also includes a list of social networks the user belongs to in the socialNetworks property.
href - (42:22 in video) Every resource includes a full link to it on the REST service. A call to GET /profiles/123 would return
{
"href":"https://host/profiles/123",
"givenName":"Bob",
"surname":"Smith",
"gender":"male",
"favColor":"red",
"socialNetworks": {
"href":"https://host/socialNetworkMemberships?profileId=123"
}
}
Notice that the socialNetworks property returns an object with just the href value populated. This keeps the response short and focused while also giving the end user enough information to make further requests if desired. The href property, used across the board in this manor, makes it easy (conceptually anyway) to reuse resource data structures as children of other resources.
fields - (55:44 in video) Query string parameter that instructs the server to only include the specified properties of the desired resource in the REST response.
A normal response from GET /profiles/123 would include all the properties of the resource as seen above. When the fields query param is included in the request, only the fields specified are returned. 'GET /propfiles/123?fields=surname,favColor' would return
{
"href":"https://host/profiles/123",
"surname":"Smith",
"favColor":"red"
}
expand - (45:53 in video) Query string parameter that instructs the server to flesh out the specified child resources in the result. Using our example, if you were to call GET /profiles/123?expand=socialNetworks you might receive something like
{
"href":"https://host/profiles/123",
"givenName":"Bob",
"surname":"Smith",
"gender":"male",
"favColor":"red",
"socialNetworks": {
"href":"https://host/socialNetworkMemberships?profileId=123",
"items": [
{
"href":"https://host/socialNetworkMemberships/abcde",
"siteName":"Facebook",
"profileUrl":"http://www.facebook.com/..."
},
...
]
}
}
So...in my opinion ServiceStack's best feature is that it makes sending, receiving and handling POCOs over HTTP super easy. How you set up the POCOs and what you do in between (within the 'Service') is up to you. Does SS have opinions? Yes. Do you have to agree with them? No. (But you probably should :))
I think expanding on something like below would get you close to how you want to handle your api. Probably not the best example of ServiceStack but the ServiceStack code/requirements are barely noticeable and don't get in your way (AppHost configure not shown). You could probably do something similar in other .NET Frameworks (MVC/Web API/etc) but, in my opinion, won't look as much like straight C#/.NET code as with ServiceStack.
Request classes
[Route("/Profiles/{Id}")]
public class Profiles
{
public int? Id { get; set; }
}
[Route("/SocialNetworks/{Id}")]
public class SocialNetworks
{
public int? Id { get; set; }
}
Base Response class
public class BaseResponse
{
protected virtual string hrefPath
{
get { return ""; }
}
public string Id { get; set; }
public string href { get { return hrefPath + Id; } }
}
Classes from example
public class Profile : BaseResponse
{
protected override string hrefPath { get { return "https://host/profiles/"; } }
public string GivenName { get; set; }
public string SurName { get; set; }
public string Gender { get; set; }
public string FavColor { get; set; }
public List<BaseResponse> SocialNetworks { get; set; }
}
public class SocialNetwork: BaseResponse
{
protected override string hrefPath { get { return "https://host/socialNetworkMemberships?profileId="; }}
public string SiteName { get; set; }
public string ProfileUrl { get; set; }
}
Services
public class ProfileService : Service
{
public object Get(Profiles request)
{
var testProfile = new Profile { Id= "123", GivenName = "Bob", SurName = "Smith", Gender = "Male", FavColor = "Red",
SocialNetworks = new List<BaseResponse>
{
new SocialNetwork { Id = "abcde", SiteName = "Facebook", ProfileUrl = "http://www.facebook.com/"}
}
};
if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(this.Request.QueryString.Get("fields")) || !String.IsNullOrEmpty(this.Request.QueryString.Get("expand")))
return ServiceHelper.BuildResponseObject<Profile>(testProfile, this.Request.QueryString);
return testProfile;
}
}
public class SocialNetworkService : Service
{
public object Get(SocialNetworks request)
{
var testSocialNetwork = new SocialNetwork
{
Id = "abcde",
SiteName = "Facebook",
ProfileUrl = "http://www.facebook.com/"
};
if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(this.Request.QueryString.Get("fields")) || !String.IsNullOrEmpty(this.Request.QueryString.Get("expand")))
return ServiceHelper.BuildResponseObject<SocialNetwork>(testSocialNetwork, this.Request.QueryString);
return testSocialNetwork;
}
}
Reflection Helper Class
public static class ServiceHelper
{
public static object BuildResponseObject<T>(T typedObject, NameValueCollection queryString) where T: BaseResponse
{
var newObject = new ExpandoObject() as IDictionary<string, object>;
newObject.Add("href", typedObject.href);
if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(queryString.Get("fields")))
{
foreach (var propertyName in queryString.Get("fields").Split(',').ToList())
{
//could check for 'socialNetwork' and exclude if you wanted
newObject.Add(propertyName, typedObject.GetType().GetProperty(propertyName, BindingFlags.IgnoreCase | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance).GetValue(typedObject, null));
}
}
if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(queryString.Get("expand")))
{
foreach (var propertyName in queryString.Get("expand").Split(',').ToList())
{
newObject.Add(propertyName, typedObject.GetType().GetProperty(propertyName, BindingFlags.IgnoreCase | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance).GetValue(typedObject, null));
}
}
return newObject;
}
}
Usually you can control the serialization of your DTOs by setting the DataMember attributes. With those attributes you can control if the property should have defaults or not.
Meaning if you simply do not define the property of the object you want to return, it should not be serialized and therefore will not be shown in the resulting Json.
ServiceStack internally uses the standard DataContract...Serializer, so this should be supported
Otherwise you could also make use of dynamic objects and simply compose your object at runtime, serialize it and send it back.
Here is a very very basic example:
var seri = JsonSerializer.Create(new JsonSerializerSettings() { });
using (var textWriter = new StringWriter())
{
var writer = new JsonTextWriter(textWriter);
dynamic item = new { Id = id };
seri.Serialize(writer, item);
return textWriter.ToString();
}
Lets imaging the we have model:
public class InheritModel
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
public string OtherData { get; set; }
}
We have a controller with View, that represents this model:
private InheritModel GetAll()
{
return new InheritModel
{
Name = "name1",
Description = "decs 1",
OtherData = "other"
};
}
public ActionResult Index()
{
return View(GetAll());
}
Now we can edit this in View, change some data and post in back to server:
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult Index(InheritModel model)
{
var merged = new MergeModel();
return View(merged.Merge(model, GetAll()));
}
What i need to do:
In view we have a reproduction of model
User change something and post
Merge method need to compare field-by-field posted model and previous model
Merge method create a new InheritModel with data that was changed in posted model, all other data should be null
Can somebody help me to make this Merge method?
UPDATE(!)
It's not a trivial task. Approaching like:
public InheritModel Merge(InheritModel current, InheritModel orig)
{
var result = new InheritModel();
if (current.Id != orig.Id)
{
result.Id = current.Id;
}
}
Not applicable. It's should be Generic solution. We have more than 200 properties in the model. And the first model is built from severeal tables from DB.
public InheritModel Merge(InheritModel current, InheritModel orig)
{
var result = new InheritModel();
if (current.Id != orig.Id)
{
result.Id = current.Id;
}
if (current.Name != orig.Name)
{
result.Name = current.Name;
}
... for the other properties
return result;
}
Another possibility is to use reflection and loop through all properties and set their values:
public InheritModel Merge(InheritModel current, InheritModel orig)
{
var result = new InheritModel();
var properties = TypeDescriptor.GetProperties(typeof(InheritModel));
foreach (PropertyDescriptor property in properties)
{
var currentValue = property.GetValue(current);
if (currentValue != property.GetValue(orig))
{
property.SetValue(result, currentValue);
}
}
return result;
}
Obviously this works only for 1 level nesting of properties.
Per topic, it seems that what you want is a sort of "change tracking" mechanism which is definitely not trivial or simple by any means. Probably, it makes sense to use any modern ORM solution to do that for you, does it?
Because otherwise you need to develop something that maintains the "context" (the 1st level object cache) like EF's ObjectContext or NH's Session that would be generic solution.
Also, there is no information on what happens at the lower level - how do you actualy save the data. Do you already have some mechanism that saves the object by traversing it's "non-null" properties?
I have a similar project experience, which made me thought a lot about the original design. Think the following question:
You have a view that representing a model, then users modified
something of the model in the view, all the CHANGES are posted to
server and the model is modified, and then it's saved to database
probably. What's posted to the server on earth?
An instance of InheritModel? No. You want the changes only. It's actually part of InheritModel, it's a InheritModel Updater, it's an instance of Updater<InheritModel>. And in your question you need to merge two models, because your Update method looks like:
public InheritModel Update(InheritedModel newModel)
{
//assign the properties of the newModel to the old, and save it to db
//return the latest version of the InheritedModel
}
Now ask yourself: why do I need a whole instance of InheritedModel when I just want to update one property only?
So my final solution is: posting the changes to the controller, the argument is something like a Updater<TModel>, not TModel itself. And the Updater<TModel> can be applied to a TModel, the properties metioned in the updater is assigned and saved. There shouldn't a MERGE operation.
I have a c# object (below) that I'm trying to send to my javascript.
My problem is, that while I can iterate over the items in the list, I can't get to the string-property ('Period').
Referencing the object in JS shows no property at all. After Json-encoding in c#, I can still see the property just before returning it to caller (hovering over the result variable in below function):
[OutputCache(Duration = 0, VaryByParam = "None")]
public JsonResult GetRankingList() {
Response.ContentType = "text/javascript";
var user = _userService.GetUserByPrincipal(User);
// Note, we do this while the user waits as we need to make progress in repeated calls to get the compared ranking list.
_businessLogicServiceMaintenance.PerformMaintenanceSteps();
//TODO: Replace with userid (Guid)
var rankingList = _presenterService.GetRankingListForDisplay(user);
if (rankingList == null)
return Json("");
var result = Json(rankingList);
return result;
}
How on earth can I get past this? Any comments appreciated!
Yours, Anders, Denmark,
public class RankingListForDisplay : List<RankingListLine>
{
public string Period { get; set; }
}
Thanks for taking your time - I found a solution.
I changed above implementation of RankingListForDisplay to the one below. For some reason json likes it way better ;-)
public class RankingListForDisplay
{
public List<RankingListLine> Lines { get; set; }
public string Period { get; set; }
public RankingListForDisplay()
{
Lines = new List<RankingListLine>();
Period = "<Unspecified>";
}
}