View logic or not for Drop Down list? - c#

I'm developing a ASP.NET MVC application. I have following class:
public class Organization {
// Organization ID
public int Id {get; set;}
// Organization name
public string Name {get; set;}
// City where organization is located
public string CityName {get;set;}
}
This class is using in Model:
public class OrganizationsModel {
public Organization[] Organizations { get; set; }
}
In a view I want to render drop down list for picking an organization:
#Html.DropDownList("org", Model.OrganizationsList.Select(x => new SelectListItem { Value = x.Id, Text = String.Format("{0} ({1})", x.Name, x.CityName) }))
I have some fear about this:
new SelectListItem { Value = x.Id, Text = String.Format("{0} ({1})", x.Name, x.CityName) }
Is the view is wrong place for combining text for each option in drop down list? Maybe I should place this code to view model or controller? Looks like current code breaking MVC paradigm.

The code you're performing in the view is only related to creating display elements, so the view seems the right place to do that. You don't want to create SelectListItem, a class only related to display, in your model or controller.

From my point of view thats perfectly okay. The view is tailored to the gui needs. If you can push the concatenated information into the view without creating a model fields, that's fine.

You can also just place a property with only a getter:
public string GetCombinedName {
get {
return String.Format("{0} ({1})", this.Name, this.CityName);
}
}
On the Organization model. Or split it out on a OrganizationViewModel with this property on.

I also agree that this is completely fine in the view, but what I would say is that you should ensure that if this logic is required in multiple views, you shouldn't repeat the logic in another view, you should push it up into shared logic, such as in your business layer, or into a Html helper.

Related

Sending back a different model from the view

I want to send details of 2 different models to the view so I do this with a view model.
namespace Apps.Models
{
public class viewmodel1
{
public App app { get; set; }
public List<Colleague> colleague { get; set; }
}
}
app being a model that stores a variety of properties about an application, and colleague being a model that stores a variety of properties about colleagues.
Originally I was only passing in app, but I want to be able to display a drop down list of the colleagues first names in this view when creating an app (because the two are linked) so i need to pass in all the current colleagues to get their first names. This part is working.
However, my action result needs to change when the form is submitted to take in this new viewmodel type, and I don't know how to access the properties from the action result. Normally when you bind include there are just properties in the model, but i want to include the properties that are WITHIN the objects the viewmodel has. I don't know how to do this or of i am just doing something wrong.
I would obviously like to retain the validation that is already written for the app properties, but I'm not sure I can do that this way.
Not sure if this is the answer to your question without seeing the xaml binding you are trying to use, but you can use bindings that dive into objects.
So if you have an Employee object that is your DataContext (Employee would be your ViewModel although it has no controller logic, so I guess it's just a model here):
public class Employee
{
public string Name {get; set;}
public EmpAddress Address {get; set;}
}
public class EmpAddress
{
public string Street {get; set;}
public string Zip {get; set;
}
You can do bindings that look like this:
<TextBlock Text={Binding Address.Street}/>
Let me know if this isn't what you were after and I'll try to help.

Do formatting helper methods belong in the model, the view model, or a separate class?

I have a model that stores company information, including tax IDs. In the US, these are 9 digit numbers and are typically displayed as ##-#######. However, in my system, I am storing these as strings with no hyphen - since other countries can have identification numbers that differ in length and format, I don't want be limited to a US standard.
Now I want to program my views to display US tax IDs in their "friendly" format. I have this working right now with a helper method I put in the Company model class:
public string FormatTaxID(string TaxID)
{
if (Address.Country == "United States")
return Regex.Replace(TaxID, #"(\d{2})(\d{7})", "$1-$2");
else
return TaxID;
}
Then in my view, I'm using:
#item.FormatTaxID(item.TaxID)
This all works fine, but it doesn't feel right to store a method like this in the model - it feels like this is more of a view/view model responsibility than a model responsibility, as it is solely for presentation.
I am using view models and thought of putting it there, but I I have multiple view models for the underlying model and don't want to repeat code if I don't have to. Also, my view model for the index uses collections and I'm not sure how I would work the method into it:
public class CompanyIndexViewModel
{
public IEnumerable<Company> Companies { get; set; }
public IEnumerable<Document> Documents { get; set; }
}
How would I apply this method to a collection like that?
Another option is creating a new helper/utility class and sticking it in there. What would MVC convention dictate?
For one-offs, I'd say use the view model. If it's something that you will reuse over and over, move it into a utility class that your views/view models/etc. can reference.
And, there's technically nothing wrong sort of doing it both ways. Put the method in a utility class and then add a property to your view model that returns this, e.g.:
public class CompanyIndexViewModel
{
...
public string TaxID { get; set; }
public string USFormattedTaxID
{
get { return Utilities.FormatTaxID(TaxID); }
}
}
The localized-to-the-Company-context TaxID of the company is properly a property of the Company, and is not a presentation detail.

MVC DropDownListfor() Basics

I have a Model which consist of Employees information. In my model there is a property called City which define the city of Employee in which he lives. The propery is shown below
public string City{get;set;}
Now I have a view which contains a form which will be filled by a employee to register. I want to use a dropdownlist for selecting cities. I think the below code will be used for dropdown as i discovered. My model name is Employee.
#Html.DropDownListFor(m=>m.City,new SelectList())
Please tell me that "is there any way to define the options for dropdownlist in SelectList() method directly Like ... in html?"
If not, where should i define the class for this drop down, where to call and where to render.I don't know where to define values? I am very confused because this is mvc and we have to seperate concern and i think we cannot define anything at anywhere?
Thanks in advance..
You have at least two options:
1.) Add a list, array, or any other collection type of cities to your model
2.) Add a SelectList property to your model
Option 1 can be something as simple as an array of strings, or can be, say, an IEnumerable of City objects. You would then need to transform this property to a collection of SelectListItem objects in the view as part of the DropDownList binding.
Option 2 has the advantage of being capable of direct binding to the DropDownList, but requires that you construct the list within the action method.
Then end result is the same, it's just a matter of how pedantic you want to be about SoC.
For example (assuming you add a property called Cities):
#Html.DropDownListFor(m=>m.City, Model.Cities.Select(city => new SelectListItem()
{
Text = city,
Value = city,
Selected = city == Model.City
})
EDIT:
To answer your comment, I have to make some assumptions. I will assume you have a model called EmployeeModel. This model has a property, City, that is a plain string. So, this is a partial of your model, as I assume it to be:
public class EmployeeModel
{
public string City { get; set; }
// ... other properties ...
}
So, if you need to add a property for binding to your dropdown, you would do one of the following:
public class EmployeeModel
{
public string City { get; set; }
public IEnumerable<string> Cities { get; set; }
// ... other properties ...
}
or
public class EmployeeModel
{
public string City { get; set; }
public SelectList Cities { get; set; }
// ... other properties ...
}
This new property will contain the list of cities that you allow your user(s) to pick from.
If you choose the first option, you load the IEnumerable from your datastore, and then use the first example above in your view, which uses LINQ to project each string in the Cities property into a new SelectListItem object.
If you go with the second option, you build a SelectList in the action prior to passing the model to the view. This isn't terribly difficult, as the class provides a constructor that takes an IEnumerable (your list of cities) and the "selected value," which will be the City property (see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd460123%28v=vs.108%29.aspx). Your code would look something like:
model.Cities = new SelectList(GetCities(), model.City);
This, of course, assumes you have a helper method (GetCities()) to load your cities from wherever they are stored. Your view then would have something like this:
#Html.DropDownListFor(m=>m.City, model.Cities)
The view engine then uses these SelectListItems to build the <select> element and it's <option> elements.
You could have this in your model, it's quickly achieved, although I wouldn't recommend it:
public class Place
{
public string City{get;set;}
public SelectListItem[] Cities()
{
return new SelectListItem[2] { new SelectListItem() { Text = "London" }, new SelectListItem() { Text = "New York" } };
}
}
...and your view
#Html.DropDownListFor(m => m.City, Model.Cities())
I think the best place for something like this (but is a little more complicated) is your own htmlhelper and usage could look something like:
#html.CityDropDownFor(m => m.City)
You could cache the cities nicely and it keeps data and UI work out of your models.
If you want to learn more about creating your own helpers, I'd suggest a bit of a [read up].1

What is the model in MVVM for?

I have read several articles, tutorials and blog posts about the MVVM pattern. However there is one thing I don't understand. Taking the three "layers":
Model
View
View Model
As far as I have understood MVVM the model contains the "raw" data, e.g. a name and address in case of a Student class. The view model exposes properties to the view which represent data of the model.
Example for a property in the view model
public string Name {
get { return model.Name; }
set { model.Name = value; }
}
Example for the model
private string name;
public string Name {
get { return name; }
set { name = value; }
}
This might sound a bit stupid but doesn't this create a redundancy? Why do I have to keep the name in the model and in the view model? Why should one not handle the name on the view model completely?
In such a simple example, this answer would be yes (it is unreasonably redundant). But, presumably, a page will contain more than just a single Model object. You may have the page state as well as multiple other Model objects which must all be tracked. This is done in the ViewModel.
For example, you may have additional information about the logged in user displayed in a status bar, as well as a service running to detect changes to a text file.
You may also have a form for editing the Student object. If you intend to validate those changes, then you wouldn't want to directly edit the Student object until after the modifications have been verified. The ViewModel can act as a temporary storage location in such a case.
Note on the above: It is not uncommon for validation to occur in the Model, but even then you will probably want the user to be able to enter invalid values while in the process of editing a form. For example, if your Model does not allow a zero-length value in a field, you still want to enable your user to delete the value, move to another field (say, for example, to copy it) then return to the field and finish editing (paste). If you are tied directly to the Model, then your validation logic may not handle this "in-between", "not-yet-finished" state as you'd like. For example, you might not want to accost your user with validation errors until they've finished and clicked 'Save'.
You will also probably have Command objects in the ViewModel to handle button clicks and the like. These would be domain-specific objects that would be useless in a Model.
ViewModels are also useful when you need to filter or somehow temporarily "modify" Model objects to get something useful on the screen. For example, you may want to display a list of all the Users in a system along with a real-time list of the top ten performers among them (updated every 10 seconds). Or you may want to show a list of Reports and a graph showing the overall usage rate, etc. Filtering, sorting and customizing that data would take place within the ViewModel.
The Model, on the other hand, is typically as pure as possible. Ideally, you want only POCOs that (usually) model exactly what's in your persistent storage (database, or what have you). If your persistent storage has FirstName and LastName fields, then so would your Model. Only in your ViewModel would you combine them to get a Name field (either "First Last" or "Last, First" depending on the View's needs).
For example:
namespace Model
{
public class Student
{
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
}
public class Class
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public float Score { get; set; }
}
}
namespace ViewModel
{
public class EditStudentRecordViewModel
{
private Model.Student _student;
private IEnumerable<Model.Class> _studentClasses;
/* Bind your View to these fields: */
public string FullName
{
return _student.LastName + ", " + _student.FirstName;
}
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
public IEnumerable<Model.Class> PassingClasses
{
get
{
return _studentClasses.Where( c => c.Score >= 78 );
}
}
public IEnumerable<Model.Class> FailingClasses
{
get
{
return _studentClasses.Where( c => c.Score < 78 );
}
}
public void Save()
{
List<string> l_validationErrors = new List<string>();
if ( string.IsNullOrEmpty( this.FirstName ) )
l_validationErrors.Add( "First Name must not be empty." );
if ( string.IsNullOrEmpty( this.LastName ) )
l_validationErrors.Add( "Last Name must not be empty." );
if ( l_validationErrors.Any() )
return;
_student.FirstName = this.FirstName;
_student.LastName = this.LastName;
Model.Utilities.SaveStudent( _student );
}
}
}
The model is the object graph that contains your business logic.
That's where you hold the behaviour (validation, calculation and such).
The ViewModel is something that models the UI and its interactions.
These are different and have different reasons for existing - the point of the pattern is to separate your display logic to the VVM (View and ViewModel) and have your business logic completely separated.
The view model is where you would keep track of properties that are specific to the view and not necessary to the model.
Let's take your model, assume it's called Person.
And then you create a view model for Person called PersonViewModel, which looks like this:
public class PersonViewModel
{
public Person Person { get; set; }
}
(Note, you might not want to expose the model like this directly, but that's another story)
Now let's say that you have an button in the view which is used to save the Person instance. To provide a better user experience (UX), you want to enable the button only if your model has actually changed. So you implement the INotifyPropertyChanged interface on the Person class:
public class Person : INotifyPropertyChanged
{
...
Now, you could expose a HasUnsavedChanges property from your Person which the Enabled property on the save button would bind to, but that logic has nothing to do with the person.
This is where the view model comes in. You would define this view-specific property on the view model, like so:
public class PersonViewModel
{
public Person Person { get; set; }
public bool HasUnsavedChanges { get; set; }
}
Then, your view model would subscribe to the PropertyChanged event of the INotifyPropertyChanged interface, and toggle the HasUnsavedChanges property on the view model.
Then, if the binding is set up correctly, the save button would enable/disable when any change happens on your model, but your model doesn't have any logic tying it to the view.
Note that you'd have to also implement INotifyPropertyChanged on the view model as well for your view to pick up when changes are made to the view model it is bound to.
Again, the point is acting as a bridge to contain the logic that is a combination of model properties and view properties that don't belong on the model.
Model in MVVM is exactly the same as in MVP or Model2 MVC. It is the one part of MVC-inspired patterns that is not affected by variations on the theme.
Model is the layer which contains repositories, units of work, domain/model objects, data mappers, services and some other structures. All they combined create the model layer, which contains all of the domain business logic for the particular application.
Model is not any single instance. Anyone who tels you otherwise is full of it.
The specific usecases, for which MVVM has been designed, are situation, when you are unable to modify either the model layer or view instances, or both.
P.S. Though, if you are using ViewModel instances as per ASP.NET MVC documentation, then you actually are NOT using MVVM. It is just Model2 MVC with different names for things (where "viewmodels" are actually views and "views" are templates). They kinda messed up when they marketed Rails-like architecture as "MVC".
I've always viewed Models as the "Building Blocks" of the application. They are usually self-contained classes with some properties and perhaps some rudimentary validation or logic for its own properties only.
View Models on the other hand are my actual application classes that end up using the "building blocks" (Models) when building and running the application. They do things like perform advanced validation, process commands, handle events, any kind of business logic, etc.
It should be noted that you don't have to expose your Model's properties in your ViewModel like you have in your example code. Doing so is the "MVVM purist" approach as it completely separates your Model layer from the View layer, however it's also perfectly acceptable to expose the entire Model to the View instead. This is what I typically use in most small projects due to it's simplicity and lack of code-duplication.
public MyModel CurrentModel
{
get { return _model; }
set
{
if (_model != value)
{
_model = value;
RaisePropertyChanged("CurrentModel");
}
}
}
However if there are cases where only a few properties from the Model is needed in the View, or if the project is large enough where I'll want to keep the layers totally separate, then I expose my Model's properties to the View through the ViewModel like you have in your example code.

MVC3 format nullable DateTime in TextBoxFor without changing model

I am new to MVC3 and am still trying to pick up on the good programming practices. I had a heck of a time trying to format how a DateTime? was being displayed in my MVC3 project that doesn't have an explicit ModelName.cs file associated with the class the date was coming from.
We had a database already in place and use a .edmx (ours is called Pooling.edmx) that we get our models from. I obviously didn't want to edit the designer file to fit this widely accepted solution: Date only from TextBoxFor().
I then tried another solution which I found here: Using Html.TextBoxFor with class and custom property (MVC)
which uses:
#Html.TextBoxFor(m => m.Name, new { data_bind="value: Name", #class = "title width-7" })
This worked as I was able to use custom attributes, add class names, and set a Value all at once.
I transformed this:
#Html.TextBoxFor(m => Model.PrePoolOwner.OglDateEffective, new Dictionary<string, object> { { "class", "check-dirty input-small datePicker" }, { "data-original-value", #Model.PrePoolOwner.OglDateEffective } })
into this (which seems really ugly...and leads to me to the question):
#Html.TextBoxFor(m => Model.PrePoolOwner.OglDateEffective, new { data_original_value = Model.PrePoolOwner.OglDateEffective.HasValue ? Model.PrePoolOwner.OglDateEffective.Value.ToString("MM/dd/yyyy") : null, #class = "datePicker check-dirty", #Value = Model.PrePoolOwner.OglDateEffective.HasValue ? Model.PrePoolOwner.OglDateEffective.Value.ToString("MM/dd/yyyy") : null })
Is it better to find and use these other ways (like underscores will translate into dashes, etc) to display the information, or should I be having a ModelName.cs file to change how it is displayed at the Model level?
For some reason I feel having a huge Pooling.edmx file, that maps out our database, is limiting us now and will in the future on how we access/present/change data as the website evolves.
To get a "PrePoolOwner" object which is called up above by Model.PrePoolOwner.OglDateEffective, we have a PrePoolOwnerRow.cs file that does:
namespace OCC_Tracker.Models
{
public class PrePoolOwnerRow
{
public bool Dirty { get; set; }
public bool Delete { get; set; }
public PrePoolOwner PrePoolOwner { get; set; }
public PrePoolOwnerRow(PrePoolOwner owner)
{
this.Dirty = false;
this.Delete = false;
this.PrePoolOwner = owner;
}
public PrePoolOwnerRow()
{ }
}
}
We then call at the top of our .cshtml file
#model OCC_Tracker.Models.PrePoolOwnerRow
Ok, so a few suggestions.
First, in your example, PrePoolOwnerRow is your view model. This, in itself, is fine. But the code smell is where you expose PrePoolOwner -- a domain entity -- through your view model, PrePoolOwnerRow.
So first thing I would suggest is to update your view model to something more like this:
public class PrePoolOwnerModel
{
public bool Dirty { get; set; }
public bool Delete { get; set; }
public DateTime? OglDateEffective { get; set; }
public String OglDateEffective { get; set; }
// Other public properties here that map to properties on your PrePoolOwner entity.
}
All I did here was drop the reference to the domain model, and replace it with (a placehold comment to) the properties from your model, needed by your view.
In your controller, fetch your PrePoolOwner model, and map it to your view model using AutoMapper (this is a hypothetical example, as I don't know what your view is doing):
public ViewResult Index(int id)
{
PrePoolOwner entity = myservice.GetPrePoolOwner(id);
PrePoolOwnerModel model = Mapper.Map<PrePoolOwnerModel>(entity);
return View(model);
}
Now, to address the issue w/ the DateTime textbox, you should look at using MVC Editor Templates (this is another subject altogether, but Google it to find many topics covering the subject). This gives you more flexibility and re-usability over rendering elements of like types (i.e. DateTime).
But, aside from using that, you can add another property to your model, and use AutoMapper to set the DateTime appropriately. So, something like this in your controller, execpt you would set up a mapping in AutoMapper to handle this:
public class PrePoolOwnerModel
{
....
public String OglDateEffectiveValue { get; set; }
....
}
public ViewResult Index(int id)
{
....
model.OglDateEffectiveValue = model.OglDateEffective.HasValue ?
model.OglDateEffective.Value.ToString("MM/dd/yyyy") :
String.Empty;
....
}
Once that is set up, you can just use this new model property (OglDateEffectiveValue) for your attributes on your textbox.
I know there's a lot I covered there, but dig in and experiment with modeling your view models like this, and using AutoMapper to map the data to your view model exactly like you need it to be on your view.
Keep your view logic very simple. Avoid using anything crazy beyond the occasion loop, and maybe an if conditional here or there.

Categories

Resources