"Build Your Own ASP.NET Website Using C# & VB.NET" released by SitePoint

[Terry_Dean]

Well I would be happy to discuss it but I figure it's an issue with M$ way of developing their web controls. Honestly, I look at validation on w3c as a measuring tool (sort of like a spell checker in word) that sometimes what you mean to say word doesn't agree with. Sometimes, what the situation calls for w3c wouldn't like. But feel free to voice your opinions elsewhere or here.

This all sounds like a gang up on Microsoft but on the contrary I would love to make use of the powerful features in ASP.Net but not at the expense of dropping standards and using deprecated techniques (ie table layouts) for the sake of convenience.

Currently I'm working my way through the web controls to see which ones actually put out compliant code (with xhtml 1.0 strict!) and I noticed the first problem I have is with the HtmlForm control itself. It outputs the following which of course throws two errors when you try to validate it.

<form name="_ctl0" method="post" action="Default.aspx" id="_ctl0">
<input type="hidden" name="__VIEWSTATE" value="dDwtNjU0MzcyMTk1Ozs+FVQkdSgpNoUH5AYmm0r4ZnPpo4Y=" />

<strong>ASP.NET Web Controls are inserted here</strong>
</form>

Cannot use the name attribute, and there was a problem with the input type.
I thought that was it, forget about it because most Web Controls sit inside an HtmlForm Control so I tried switching the DTD to xhtml 1.0 Transitional and it validated fine. So I'll give that a go and see how far I can get.

As for the rest of the web controls its going to be fun finding out. Please no-one tell me how the book ends. ;-)

GREAT book Zak!

Terry

[zakruvalcaba]

It ends with a nice appendix!

[oberon]

Zak,

I am sorry to be tiresome, but where else can I ask questions about the book?

I am still about HtmlGenericControl - why doesn't it work according to the book's example?

[Terry_Dean]

Zak,

I am sorry to be tiresome, but where else can I ask questions about the book?

I am still about HtmlGenericControl - why doesn't it work according to the book's example?

Can I suggest you put a Web Form around it like this:

<form runat="server">
<span id="myGC" runat="server">I like ASP.NET</span>
<br />
<button id="myB" runat="server" OnServerClick="Click">Click Here</button>
</form>

regards,

Terry

[oberon]

Yes!

I am sure I tried this before but it did't work then, perhaps I did some mistake somewhere. And now it works all right.

Thank you, Terry!

[Atirez]

This all sounds like a gang up on Microsoft but on the contrary I would love to make use of the powerful features in ASP.Net but not at the expense of dropping standards and using deprecated techniques (ie table layouts) for the sake of convenience.

Currently I'm working my way through the web controls to see which ones actually put out compliant code (with xhtml 1.0 strict!) and I noticed the first problem I have is with the HtmlForm control itself. It outputs the following which of course throws two errors when you try to validate it.


Cannot use the name attribute, and there was a problem with the input type.
I thought that was it, forget about it because most Web Controls sit inside an HtmlForm Control so I tried switching the DTD to xhtml 1.0 Transitional and it validated fine. So I'll give that a go and see how far I can get.

As for the rest of the web controls its going to be fun finding out. Please no-one tell me how the book ends. ;-)

GREAT book Zak!

Terry

You should be pretty much OK with transitional, major problems come in with the DataGrid control (use the repeater instead) and the ImageButton, further some of the client side script from .Net is not output correctly (i.e. not valid.) I have got around this problem by doing small parsing operation before the page is sent to the browser.

I did hear a long time ago a few people where re-working most of the controls to be W3C compliant, but have not really looked into it since. However, if it is really important you could create some custom controls then you will have full control of the output.

Barry

[Terry_Dean]

Yes!

Thank you, Terry!

No Problem Oberon.

You should be pretty much OK with transitional, major problems come in with the DataGrid control (use the repeater instead) and the ImageButton, further some of the client side script from .Net is not output correctly (i.e. not valid.) I have got around this problem by doing small parsing operation before the page is sent to the browser.

I did hear a long time ago a few people where re-working most of the controls to be W3C compliant, but have not really looked into it since. However, if it is really important you could create some custom controls then you will have full control of the output.

Barry

Ok thanks for the info Barry, I really like the sound of creating custom controls that seems like the way to go if they're not too difficult to make. Do you have a link to info on creating these controls or is it covered in the book Zak?

regards

Terry

[M. Johansson]

Why in the hell people are so anal about XHTML output is beyond me. it works fine in all browsers, and when you upgrade to .NET 2.0 in the beginning of next year, it will be valid. Why go to all this trouble?

[Atirez]

Why in the hell people are so anal about XHTML output is beyond me. it works fine in all browsers, and when you upgrade to .NET 2.0 in the beginning of next year, it will be valid. Why go to all this trouble?

Because some of us work in areas where the company is liable for not making websites accessible, I am not goverened by Section 508 as I reside in the UK but there are laws here that govern the work I do. As I work in an educational establishment i.e. Government Owned.

Further if no one is bothered about following standards, what is the point in having them?

[Terry_Dean]

Why in the hell people are so anal about XHTML output is beyond me. it works fine in all browsers, and when you upgrade to .NET 2.0 in the beginning of next year, it will be valid. Why go to all this trouble?

It takes more than valid XHTML output to make a site accessible Mattias. That is only the first step in the process, if the output code doesn't "cut the mustard", you're wasting your time also writing compliant CSS, and employing accessibility techniques. But then again if you're not interested in developing "Accessible" websites its only something people like us have to worry about.

Just because a site looks ok in Internet Explorer or Netscape doesn't mean it will be intelligible to a braille reader, or some other adaptive technology. If the code is out of whack it doesn't stand a chance.

My wife nurses someone who uses a special pointer strapped to his head to navigate web sites using the keyboard, he's paralysed from the chest down. It takes him hours to do things that you and I take for granted. Try telling him he's just being anal.

Terry

[rbutler]

Ok thanks for the info Barry, I really like the sound of creating custom controls that seems like the way to go if they're not too difficult to make. Do you have a link to info on creating these controls or is it covered in the book Zak?

I think this topic needs to start another thread if its continued out of respect for the book. Newbies don't need the hassle of asking a relevant question. Custom controls are simply controls you build yourself out of exisiting asp.net web pages. zak's book discusses them toward the end, think he covers in them in 10 pages or so can't recall for sure (oh hell I'll look it up). chapter 16 is where you need to look.

I would have to agree with Terry on the part of accessibility. Correct output is only the start. Study any usuablity project from any many corporation and they go well beyond the correct output.

[rskyles]

Great book, but I haven't seen something regarding Authentication. I'm in chapter 14 and just finished "Logging Users Out".

Is there are way to give all users access to the site, but to only give Admin users access to the "Admin" page? It seems like when you use the Web.config file to deny users "?", that you have to be logged on to even VIEW the index page.

Thanks,

[zakruvalcaba]

You can put the admin pages within a separate folder and then use a separate Web.Config within that folder to only allow access to the admin username.

[rskyles]

Ah! Great idea. Didn't think about that, because my brain is tired. Thanks, Zak!

[afrika]

Thanks a lot. Guess i could upgrade now from ASP2.NET

[rskyles]

I like the navigation bar which is easily updated from the database. Is there a way to make the background change color on mouse over?

Second, is there a way to have a list of subcategories drop down for selection when you mouse over?

I know you can do this w/ Java and DHTML, but It seems the database option, as shown in the book, would be the best way to go.

Thx,

[rskyles]

Zak,

Any plans for a "next step" ASP.NET book? I just finished your ASP.NET book and it was great, but I think it would be good to use the dorknozzle project to add some more advanced stuff (doesn't have to be too long) or delve more into the items you hit.

I'm asking, because your book was very easy to understand and practical. Much easier than other books, or trying to learn on the web.

Thanks,
Rodney

[zakruvalcaba]

Thanks. Unfortunately we have no real plans right now.

[Darren884]

I hope to get my book tomorrow

[asp.da]

Just finished reading the book. It was a very good reading. The best of it is the ability of the author to show really complicated concepts, such as Web Services for example, on a few pages, and in such a way that you know immediately that you can do it and you can try it yourself. I just yesterday discovered what Web Services are, but was able to build them - well the simplest ones, but if you know how to do the simplest and you are inspired and interested, you are on the right way.

On the down side I'd say that the production team could do better. The author cannot be perfect with all the tiny details, this is the job of the editors, correctors etc. Although the whole book is not a problem, in some of the last chapters there are significantly more 'text bugs'. But, honestly, they are not a great deal if you are reading attentively - they might be even a kind of exercise to distinguish what is right and what is wrong.

Thank you, Zak, excellent book and we are waiting for the next one from you.

[zakruvalcaba]

Thanks for the feedback.

[Philip Toews]

Hi Zak,

I just got my copy this week. It is a thick one... that's for sure! Complaints about its price are therefore quite unfair!

As always with sitepoint books, the overall approach is no-nonsense and very practical... and there is no assumed knowledge. As a beginner to .NET in general and ASP.NET in particular I am grateful for that.

I ordered it along with a few other books. In initial comparison the definate advantage of your book is that it presents a cumulative learning solution. It is a step-by-step book with very sound instructional design. I really like the inclusion of explanations of SQL, MSDE and the like... they will help me get the bigger picture and to get up and running quickly.

I am also however learning Visual Studio 2003 at the same time as it offers so many ways to make coding easier. As you know, VS.NET really encourages practicing code-behind. Any guidelines to converting your code over to code-behind? :-)

Thanks for the great book!

[rbutler]

All you have to do is create a project inside VS.NET, then create all the necessary forms that are mentioned in the book. Drag your controls over into design view so that VS internally sees them, then go into the code-behind file and start coding away, works fine, been doing it lately. Only thing that drives me completely up the wall is deleting those stupid meta tags out of the head tag.

[Philip Toews]

Only thing that drives me completely up the wall is deleting those stupid meta tags out of the head tag.

Thanks for that! Which meta tags are you talking about? Do you mean all the <script></script> content in the headers?

Hey Zak! I don't suppose you have a sample VS.NET file of any of the projects in the book kicking around do you? It sure would be great if you could include them as part of the code library available to purchasers of the book. I figure I'm not alone in wanting to use Visual Studio. The incredible ease of coding and insane volume of documentation available in VS in conjunction with the power of code-behind were compelling reasons I've decided to switch focus from PHP to ASP.NET development. If you posted just a couple of samples in VS.NET format it would sure silence any critics about the code-behind issue!

TIA

[zakruvalcaba]

That's not a bad idea. You'll have to give me some time though. I'm working on the new edition of my Dreamweaver book right now and it's consuming a ton of my time.