Tables Asp.Net Visible property

Hi guys,
im having serious trouble with my tables in asp.net. i inherited a
system that allowed me to set my tables visble property to true and
false. When i try and create a table using html i do not have that
property.
does anyone know of a different way to create a table '
the system i inherited with the visible property in the tables uses
the following in the top part of the code -
system.web.ui.htmlcontrols.htmltable
is this the reason for the extra property '
my tables dont seem to have this in the code.
thanks
CGHy,
put an asp:panel around your table and you can set the visible property.
<asp:panel id="pan" runat="server">
<table>
<tr>
<td></td>
</tr>
</table>
</asp:panel>
Greez
The Filzmeister
Colin Graham schrieb:
> Hi guys,
> im having serious trouble with my tables in asp.net. i inherited a
> system that allowed me to set my tables visble property to true and
> false. When i try and create a table using html i do not have that
> property.
> does anyone know of a different way to create a table '
> the system i inherited with the visible property in the tables uses
> the following in the top part of the code -
> system.web.ui.htmlcontrols.htmltable
> is this the reason for the extra property '
> my tables dont seem to have this in the code.
> thanks
> CG
You can operate with css rules display and visibility.
Eliyahu
"Colin Graham" <csgraham74@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ee261922.0504210322.483c2912@.posting.google.com...
> Hi guys,
> im having serious trouble with my tables in asp.net. i inherited a
> system that allowed me to set my tables visble property to true and
> false. When i try and create a table using html i do not have that
> property.
> does anyone know of a different way to create a table '
> the system i inherited with the visible property in the tables uses
> the following in the top part of the code -
> system.web.ui.htmlcontrols.htmltable
> is this the reason for the extra property '
> my tables dont seem to have this in the code.
> thanks
> CG
Christian Filzwieser wrote:
> Hy,
> put an asp:panel around your table and you can set the visible
property.
> <asp:panel id="pan" runat="server">
> <table>
> <tr>
> <td></td>
> </tr>
> </table>
> </asp:panel>
>
<asp:PlaceHolder> may be a better choice because it doesn't generate
any contents itself.

Tables Asp.Net Visible property

Hi guys,

im having serious trouble with my tables in asp.net. i inherited a
system that allowed me to set my tables visble property to true and
false. When i try and create a table using html i do not have that
property.

does anyone know of a different way to create a table ??

the system i inherited with the visible property in the tables uses
the following in the top part of the code -
system.web.ui.htmlcontrols.htmltable
is this the reason for the extra property ??

my tables dont seem to have this in the code.

thanks

CGHy,
put an asp:panel around your table and you can set the visible property.

<asp:panel id="pan" runat="server">
<table>
<tr>
<td></td>
</tr>
</table>
</asp:panel
Greez
The Filzmeister

Colin Graham schrieb:
> Hi guys,
> im having serious trouble with my tables in asp.net. i inherited a
> system that allowed me to set my tables visble property to true and
> false. When i try and create a table using html i do not have that
> property.
> does anyone know of a different way to create a table ??
> the system i inherited with the visible property in the tables uses
> the following in the top part of the code -
> system.web.ui.htmlcontrols.htmltable
> is this the reason for the extra property ??
> my tables dont seem to have this in the code.
> thanks
> CG
You can operate with css rules display and visibility.

Eliyahu

"Colin Graham" <csgraham74@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ee261922.0504210322.483c2912@.posting.google.c om...
> Hi guys,
> im having serious trouble with my tables in asp.net. i inherited a
> system that allowed me to set my tables visble property to true and
> false. When i try and create a table using html i do not have that
> property.
> does anyone know of a different way to create a table ??
> the system i inherited with the visible property in the tables uses
> the following in the top part of the code -
> system.web.ui.htmlcontrols.htmltable
> is this the reason for the extra property ??
> my tables dont seem to have this in the code.
> thanks
> CG
Christian Filzwieser wrote:
> Hy,
> put an asp:panel around your table and you can set the visible
property.
> <asp:panel id="pan" runat="server">
> <table>
> <tr>
> <td></td>
> </tr>
> </table>
> </asp:panel
<asp:PlaceHolder> may be a better choice because it doesn't generate
any contents itself.

Tabs...

Hi guys and girls,
I have seen the tabs on this page here (http://66.129.71.130/QuickStartv20/aspnet/doc/pages/syntax.aspx#render) to switch from VB to C#. Are those tabs easy to do? Any tips?
Any tip would be great, I am just in the process of moving from PHP to ASP.NET :)Hi,

it's done by setting the display style (css) with client side javascript so it doesn't require a postback to the server. I created some sample code that you might want to check out here:http://forums.asp.net/887783/ShowPost.aspx

Grz, Kris.
Ah, thank you for that example. I think I will be able to work with that...

Tags vs. code-behind

Hi guys..

I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
disadvantages ?

Thanks !On Feb 27, 10:36 am, "Zeba" <coolz...@.gmail.comwrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hi guys..
>
I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
disadvantages ?
>

Using code-behind you separate Business Logic and UI design

Using code-inline the script can be changed without re-deploying the
whole application.

http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/20030518.asp
Using code-inline the script can be changed without re-deploying the

Quote:

Originally Posted by

whole application.

Something that should be totally avoided in "true MVC" applications.
It's a bad practice.

Looking into the article, which reads "There are certain situations where a
purely inline - code implementation is justified"... I tend to disagree.

Also, the author does not give any concrete examply to substantiate the
statement.

In my view, inline code can be and must be totally avoided. The reason is
obvious - seggregation of the UI from the logic... the heart of MVC
pattern.

--
Happy Hacking,
Gaurav Vaish | www.mastergaurav.com
www.edujini-labs.com
http://eduzine.edujini-labs.com
-------------
"MasterGaurav (www.edujini-labs.com)" <gaurav.vaish.nospam@.nospam.gmail.com>
wrote in message news:esUtIHnWHHA.1180@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>Using code-inline the script can be changed without re-deploying the
>whole application.

>
Something that should be totally avoided in "true MVC" applications.
It's a bad practice.

I agree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by

In my view, inline code can be and must be totally avoided. The reason is
obvious - seggregation of the UI from the logic... the heart of MVC
pattern.

I would agree, apart from in one specific instance related to ASP.NET -
Global.asax, where there are sometimes justifications for in-line code...
Juan is a particular advocate of this, IIRC...
On Feb 27, 2:16 pm, "MasterGaurav \(www.edujini-labs.com\)"
<gaurav.vaish.nos...@.nospam.gmail.comwrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

It's a bad practice.

It depends on the need.
No disadvantage. MS is moving towards "code free" development.

You can expect to see a lot more of this in the future, so you may want to get into it now.

"Zeba" <coolzebs@.gmail.comwrote in message news:1172568997.043126.138660@.a75g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hi guys..
>
I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
disadvantages ?
>
Thanks !
>

The base argument is really:

Rapid Code Development VS Good Code Development.

Unless I'm whipping up a demo that needs to be done by yesterday,
I would avoid tags 99.9% of the time.

Rapid <Good most of the time.

Good development means it is maintainable (among other things), and the
<tagsapproach is cumbersome in that regard.

"Zeba" <coolzebs@.gmail.comwrote in message
news:1172568997.043126.138660@.a75g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hi guys..
>
I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
disadvantages ?
>
Thanks !
>

On Feb 27, 5:36 am, "Zeba" <coolz...@.gmail.comwrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hi guys..
>
I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
disadvantages ?
>
Thanks !

I agree with the other posters wholeheartedly. The UI should most
definitely be separated from the business logic. In my personal
experience, even for fast demos, there's no *compelling* reason to
embed the source code right in the Web page. That assumes, of course,
that you're using Visual Studio or a similar editor that's capable of
handling code-behind files. The plumbing is all handled for you, and
the development experience is virtually seamless.

However, that's my *personal* experience, and your mileage may vary.

Another consideration is whether or not you want people to see your
intellectual property. If the source code is embedded right in the
pages, it's a lot harder to protect your source code from casual
viewing. With code-behind, you can compile the business logic into one
or more DLLs and avoid deploying the .VB & .resx files altogether;
that, coupled with a decent obfuscator, helps to protect your
intellectual property.

Mike
On Feb 27, 5:36 am, "Zeba" <coolz...@.gmail.comwrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hi guys..
>
I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
disadvantages ?
>
Thanks !

I would *especially* use a code-behind for data access. You'd be
divulging details about how you connect to your data source. Big no
no.

Same goes for user authentication and authorization.

Call me paranoid. These days, a determined hacker WILL penetrate your
system if he chooses to do so, and if your code is sitting there with
the instructions for connecting to your database right in the Web
pages, you WILL live to regret it.

Be safe. Move the code into a codebehind file. Obfuscate the code
during the build. Then, prior to deployment, remove any and all source
code files (except the global.asax file). Be sure not to include any
sensitive instructions in the global.asax file. Security is
everything.

Mike

Tags vs. code-behind

Hi guys..
I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
divantages ?
Thanks !On Feb 27, 10:36 am, "Zeba" <z...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys..
> I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
> n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
> accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
> divantages ?
>
Using code-behind you separate Business Logic and UI design
Using code-inline the script can be changed without re-deploying the
whole application.
http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/20030518.asp
> Using code-inline the script can be changed without re-deploying the
> whole application.
Something that should be totally avoided in "true MVC" applications.
It's a bad practice.
Looking into the article, which reads "There are certain situations where a
purely inline - code implementation is justified"... I tend to disagree.
Also, the author does not give any concrete examply to substantiate the
statement.
In my view, inline code can be and must be totally avoided. The reason is
obvious - seggregation of the UI from the logic... the heart of MVC
pattern.
Happy Hacking,
Gaurav Vaish | www.mastergaurav.com
www.edujini-labs.com
http://eduzine.edujini-labs.com
---
"MasterGaurav (www.edujini-labs.com)" <gaurav.vaish.nospam@.nospam.gmail.com>
wrote in message news:esUtIHnWHHA.1180@.TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> Something that should be totally avoided in "true MVC" applications.
> It's a bad practice.
I agree.

> In my view, inline code can be and must be totally avoided. The reason is
> obvious - seggregation of the UI from the logic... the heart of MVC
> pattern.
I would agree, apart from in one specific instance related to ASP.NET -
Global.asax, where there are sometimes justifications for in-line code...
Juan is a particular advocate of this, IIRC...
On Feb 27, 2:16 pm, "MasterGaurav \(www.edujini-labs.com\)"
<gaurav.vaish.nos...@.nospam.gmail.com> wrote:

> It's a bad practice.
It depends on the need.
No divantage. MS is moving towards "code free" development.
You can expect to see a lot more of this in the future, so you may want to g
et into it now.
"Zeba" <zebs@.gmail.com> wrote in message news:1172568997.043126.138660@.a75g2000cwd.goog
legroups.com...
> Hi guys..
> I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
> n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
> accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
> divantages ?
> Thanks !
>
The base argument is really:
Rapid Code Development VS Good Code Development.
Unless I'm whipping up a demo that needs to be done by yesterday,
I would avoid tags 99.9% of the time.
Rapid <> Good most of the time.
Good development means it is maintainable (among other things), and the
<tags> approach is cumbersome in that regard.
"Zeba" <zebs@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1172568997.043126.138660@.a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Hi guys..
> I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
> n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
> accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
> divantages ?
> Thanks !
>
On Feb 27, 5:36 am, "Zeba" <z...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys..
> I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
> n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
> accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
> divantages ?
> Thanks !
I agree with the other posters wholeheartedly. The UI should most
definitely be separated from the business logic. In my personal
experience, even for fast demos, there's no *compelling* reason to
embed the source code right in the Web page. That assumes, of course,
that you're using Visual Studio or a similar editor that's capable of
handling code-behind files. The plumbing is all handled for you, and
the development experience is virtually seamless.
However, that's my *personal* experience, and your mileage may vary.
Another consideration is whether or not you want people to see your
intellectual property. If the source code is embedded right in the
pages, it's a lot harder to protect your source code from casual
viewing. With code-behind, you can compile the business logic into one
or more DLLs and avoid deploying the .VB & .resx files altogether;
that, coupled with a decent obfuscator, helps to protect your
intellectual property.
Mike
On Feb 27, 5:36 am, "Zeba" <z...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys..
> I just wanted to know whether its better to use the asp tags (or drag
> n drop) or write the actual code-behind for things like login, data
> accesses etc. I guess its easier to use the tags but does it have any
> divantages ?
> Thanks !
I would *especially* use a code-behind for data access. You'd be
divulging details about how you connect to your data source. Big no
no.
Same goes for user authentication and authorization.
Call me paranoid. These days, a determined hacker WILL penetrate your
system if he chooses to do so, and if your code is sitting there with
the instructions for connecting to your database right in the Web
pages, you WILL live to regret it.
Be safe. Move the code into a codebehind file. Obfuscate the code
during the build. Then, prior to deployment, remove any and all source
code files (except the global.asax file). Be sure not to include any
sensitive instructions in the global.asax file. Security is
everything.
Mike