Path resolution in Web application when AngularJs is accessing and MVC4 server - html

I am trying to create a modular applications by mixing the ASP.Net MVC4 and AngularJS. what MVC does is that it allows us to have a path separation like below.
Home screen
http://127.0.0.1:81/
when a user logs in, i provide them with a base path as below
`http://127.0.0.1:81/shipper/#/operations/home`
or
`http://127.0.0.1:81/client/#/orders/home`
so I get a base screen template per type of user and from then on it is a SPA that takes over on the template which sometimes share a common view based om the need.
now the issue i am having is that when i have to reference any server object like image on the web server that are all located in the root\themes\images\image1.jpg
the image URI in the fiddler is getting resolved to http://127.0.0.1:81/client/themes/images/image1.jpg
instead of
http://127.0.0.1:81/themes/images/image1.jpg
which obviously means this will fail.
my HTML looks like below:
<img class="media-object" src="themes/images/img180x120.png" />
is there a way I can override this to force it to ignore the /shipper or /client from the path ?
Regards, Kiran

As i turns out just preceeding the url with a / will make it a path relative the the host server.

Related

How do I generate SEO-friendly markup for a single-page web app? [duplicate]

There are a lot of cool tools for making powerful "single-page" JavaScript websites nowadays. In my opinion, this is done right by letting the server act as an API (and nothing more) and letting the client handle all of the HTML generation stuff. The problem with this "pattern" is the lack of search engine support. I can think of two solutions:
When the user enters the website, let the server render the page exactly as the client would upon navigation. So if I go to http://example.com/my_path directly the server would render the same thing as the client would if I go to /my_path through pushState.
Let the server provide a special website only for the search engine bots. If a normal user visits http://example.com/my_path the server should give him a JavaScript heavy version of the website. But if the Google bot visits, the server should give it some minimal HTML with the content I want Google to index.
The first solution is discussed further here. I have been working on a website doing this and it's not a very nice experience. It's not DRY and in my case I had to use two different template engines for the client and the server.
I think I have seen the second solution for some good ol' Flash websites. I like this approach much more than the first one and with the right tool on the server it could be done quite painlessly.
So what I'm really wondering is the following:
Can you think of any better solution?
What are the disadvantages with the second solution? If Google in some way finds out that I'm not serving the exact same content for the Google bot as a regular user, would I then be punished in the search results?
While #2 might be "easier" for you as a developer, it only provides search engine crawling. And yes, if Google finds out your serving different content, you might be penalized (I'm not an expert on that, but I have heard of it happening).
Both SEO and accessibility (not just for disabled person, but accessibility via mobile devices, touch screen devices, and other non-standard computing / internet enabled platforms) both have a similar underlying philosophy: semantically rich markup that is "accessible" (i.e. can be accessed, viewed, read, processed, or otherwise used) to all these different browsers. A screen reader, a search engine crawler or a user with JavaScript enabled, should all be able to use/index/understand your site's core functionality without issue.
pushState does not add to this burden, in my experience. It only brings what used to be an afterthought and "if we have time" to the forefront of web development.
What your describe in option #1 is usually the best way to go - but, like other accessibility and SEO issues, doing this with pushState in a JavaScript-heavy app requires up-front planning or it will become a significant burden. It should be baked in to the page and application architecture from the start - retrofitting is painful and will cause more duplication than is necessary.
I've been working with pushState and SEO recently for a couple of different application, and I found what I think is a good approach. It basically follows your item #1, but accounts for not duplicating html / templates.
Most of the info can be found in these two blog posts:
http://lostechies.com/derickbailey/2011/09/06/test-driving-backbone-views-with-jquery-templates-the-jasmine-gem-and-jasmine-jquery/
and
http://lostechies.com/derickbailey/2011/06/22/rendering-a-rails-partial-as-a-jquery-template/
The gist of it is that I use ERB or HAML templates (running Ruby on Rails, Sinatra, etc) for my server side render and to create the client side templates that Backbone can use, as well as for my Jasmine JavaScript specs. This cuts out the duplication of markup between the server side and the client side.
From there, you need to take a few additional steps to have your JavaScript work with the HTML that is rendered by the server - true progressive enhancement; taking the semantic markup that got delivered and enhancing it with JavaScript.
For example, i'm building an image gallery application with pushState. If you request /images/1 from the server, it will render the entire image gallery on the server and send all of the HTML, CSS and JavaScript down to your browser. If you have JavaScript disabled, it will work perfectly fine. Every action you take will request a different URL from the server and the server will render all of the markup for your browser. If you have JavaScript enabled, though, the JavaScript will pick up the already rendered HTML along with a few variables generated by the server and take over from there.
Here's an example:
<form id="foo">
Name: <input id="name"><button id="say">Say My Name!</button>
</form>
After the server renders this, the JavaScript would pick it up (using a Backbone.js view in this example)
FooView = Backbone.View.extend({
events: {
"change #name": "setName",
"click #say": "sayName"
},
setName: function(e){
var name = $(e.currentTarget).val();
this.model.set({name: name});
},
sayName: function(e){
e.preventDefault();
var name = this.model.get("name");
alert("Hello " + name);
},
render: function(){
// do some rendering here, for when this is just running JavaScript
}
});
$(function(){
var model = new MyModel();
var view = new FooView({
model: model,
el: $("#foo")
});
});
This is a very simple example, but I think it gets the point across.
When I instante the view after the page loads, I'm providing the existing content of the form that was rendered by the server, to the view instance as the el for the view. I am not calling render or having the view generate an el for me, when the first view is loaded. I have a render method available for after the view is up and running and the page is all JavaScript. This lets me re-render the view later if I need to.
Clicking the "Say My Name" button with JavaScript enabled will cause an alert box. Without JavaScript, it would post back to the server and the server could render the name to an html element somewhere.
Edit
Consider a more complex example, where you have a list that needs to be attached (from the comments below this)
Say you have a list of users in a <ul> tag. This list was rendered by the server when the browser made a request, and the result looks something like:
<ul id="user-list">
<li data-id="1">Bob
<li data-id="2">Mary
<li data-id="3">Frank
<li data-id="4">Jane
</ul>
Now you need to loop through this list and attach a Backbone view and model to each of the <li> items. With the use of the data-id attribute, you can find the model that each tag comes from easily. You'll then need a collection view and item view that is smart enough to attach itself to this html.
UserListView = Backbone.View.extend({
attach: function(){
this.el = $("#user-list");
this.$("li").each(function(index){
var userEl = $(this);
var id = userEl.attr("data-id");
var user = this.collection.get(id);
new UserView({
model: user,
el: userEl
});
});
}
});
UserView = Backbone.View.extend({
initialize: function(){
this.model.bind("change:name", this.updateName, this);
},
updateName: function(model, val){
this.el.text(val);
}
});
var userData = {...};
var userList = new UserCollection(userData);
var userListView = new UserListView({collection: userList});
userListView.attach();
In this example, the UserListView will loop through all of the <li> tags and attach a view object with the correct model for each one. it sets up an event handler for the model's name change event and updates the displayed text of the element when a change occurs.
This kind of process, to take the html that the server rendered and have my JavaScript take over and run it, is a great way to get things rolling for SEO, Accessibility, and pushState support.
Hope that helps.
I think you need this: http://code.google.com/web/ajaxcrawling/
You can also install a special backend that "renders" your page by running javascript on the server, and then serves that to google.
Combine both things and you have a solution without programming things twice. (As long as your app is fully controllable via anchor fragments.)
So, it seem that the main concern is being DRY
If you're using pushState have your server send the same exact code for all urls (that don't contain a file extension to serve images, etc.) "/mydir/myfile", "/myotherdir/myotherfile" or root "/" -- all requests receive the same exact code. You need to have some kind url rewrite engine. You can also serve a tiny bit of html and the rest can come from your CDN (using require.js to manage dependencies -- see https://stackoverflow.com/a/13813102/1595913).
(test the link's validity by converting the link to your url scheme and testing against existence of content by querying a static or a dynamic source. if it's not valid send a 404 response.)
When the request is not from a google bot, you just process normally.
If the request is from a google bot, you use phantom.js -- headless webkit browser ("A headless browser is simply a full-featured web browser with no visual interface.") to render html and javascript on the server and send the google bot the resulting html. As the bot parses the html it can hit your other "pushState" links /somepage on the server mylink, the server rewrites url to your application file, loads it in phantom.js and the resulting html is sent to the bot, and so on...
For your html I'm assuming you're using normal links with some kind of hijacking (e.g. using with backbone.js https://stackoverflow.com/a/9331734/1595913)
To avoid confusion with any links separate your api code that serves json into a separate subdomain, e.g. api.mysite.com
To improve performance you can pre-process your site pages for search engines ahead of time during off hours by creating static versions of the pages using the same mechanism with phantom.js and consequently serve the static pages to google bots. Preprocessing can be done with some simple app that can parse <a> tags. In this case handling 404 is easier since you can simply check for the existence of the static file with a name that contains url path.
If you use #! hash bang syntax for your site links a similar scenario applies, except that the rewrite url server engine would look out for _escaped_fragment_ in the url and would format the url to your url scheme.
There are a couple of integrations of node.js with phantom.js on github and you can use node.js as the web server to produce html output.
Here are a couple of examples using phantom.js for seo:
http://backbonetutorials.com/seo-for-single-page-apps/
http://thedigitalself.com/blog/seo-and-javascript-with-phantomjs-server-side-rendering
If you're using Rails, try poirot. It's a gem that makes it dead simple to reuse mustache or handlebars templates client and server side.
Create a file in your views like _some_thingy.html.mustache.
Render server side:
<%= render :partial => 'some_thingy', object: my_model %>
Put the template your head for client side use:
<%= template_include_tag 'some_thingy' %>
Rendre client side:
html = poirot.someThingy(my_model)
To take a slightly different angle, your second solution would be the correct one in terms of accessibility...you would be providing alternative content to users who cannot use javascript (those with screen readers, etc.).
This would automatically add the benefits of SEO and, in my opinion, would not be seen as a 'naughty' technique by Google.
Interesting. I have been searching around for viable solutions but it seems to be quite problematic.
I was actually leaning more towards your 2nd approach:
Let the server provide a special website only for the search engine
bots. If a normal user visits http://example.com/my_path the server
should give him a JavaScript heavy version of the website. But if the
Google bot visits, the server should give it some minimal HTML with
the content I want Google to index.
Here's my take on solving the problem. Although it is not confirmed to work, it might provide some insight or idea's for other developers.
Assume you're using a JS framework that supports "push state" functionality, and your backend framework is Ruby on Rails. You have a simple blog site and you would like search engines to index all your article index and show pages.
Let's say you have your routes set up like this:
resources :articles
match "*path", "main#index"
Ensure that every server-side controller renders the same template that your client-side framework requires to run (html/css/javascript/etc). If none of the controllers are matched in the request (in this example we only have a RESTful set of actions for the ArticlesController), then just match anything else and just render the template and let the client-side framework handle the routing. The only difference between hitting a controller and hitting the wildcard matcher would be the ability to render content based on the URL that was requested to JavaScript-disabled devices.
From what I understand it is a bad idea to render content that isn't visible to browsers. So when Google indexes it, people go through Google to visit a given page and there isn't any content, then you're probably going to be penalised. What comes to mind is that you render content in a div node that you display: none in CSS.
However, I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter if you simply do this:
<div id="no-js">
<h1><%= #article.title %></h1>
<p><%= #article.description %></p>
<p><%= #article.content %></p>
</div>
And then using JavaScript, which doesn't get run when a JavaScript-disabled device opens the page:
$("#no-js").remove() # jQuery
This way, for Google, and for anyone with JavaScript-disabled devices, they would see the raw/static content. So the content is physically there and is visible to anyone with JavaScript-disabled devices.
But, when a user visits the same page and actually has JavaScript enabled, the #no-js node will be removed so it doesn't clutter up your application. Then your client-side framework will handle the request through it's router and display what a user should see when JavaScript is enabled.
I think this might be a valid and fairly easy technique to use. Although that might depend on the complexity of your website/application.
Though, please correct me if it isn't. Just thought I'd share my thoughts.
Use NodeJS on the serverside, browserify your clientside code and route each http-request's(except for static http resources) uri through a serverside client to provide the first 'bootsnap'(a snapshot of the page it's state). Use something like jsdom to handle jquery dom-ops on the server. After the bootsnap returned, setup the websocket connection. Probably best to differentiate between a websocket client and a serverside client by making some kind of a wrapper connection on the clientside(serverside client can directly communicate with the server). I've been working on something like this: https://github.com/jvanveen/rnet/
Use Google Closure Template to render pages. It compiles to javascript or java, so it is easy to render the page either on the client or server side. On the first encounter with every client, render the html and add javascript as link in header. Crawler will read the html only but the browser will execute your script. All subsequent requests from the browser could be done in against the api to minimize the traffic.
This might help you : https://github.com/sharjeel619/SPA-SEO
Logic
A browser requests your single page application from the server,
which is going to be loaded from a single index.html file.
You program some intermediary server code which intercepts the client
request and differentiates whether the request came from a browser or
some social crawler bot.
If the request came from some crawler bot, make an API call to
your back-end server, gather the data you need, fill in that data to
html meta tags and return those tags in string format back to the
client.
If the request didn't come from some crawler bot, then simply
return the index.html file from the build or dist folder of your single page
application.

Express loading images relative to url

I'm building a fairly basic webpage using express. However, I'm having some trouble with my image pathways.
This code works fine.
app.use(express.static(path.join(__dirname, "/app/public/")));
app.get("/overview", function(req, res) {
res.render('some-file');
});
Inside of some-file.ejs I have...
<img src="assets/images/picture.jpg">
But what doesnt work is when I have a second url pathway.
app.get("/overview/specific", function(req, res) {
res.render('another-file');
});
<img src="assets/images/picture.jpg">
In this example I'm trying to load the exact same image (in my case its a banner thats reused on every single page). This gives me an error that the image is not found. What I've noticed from the console errors is that the image is being loaded from localhost:3000/overview/assets/images/picture.jpg
I don't understand why express is trying to load the image from whatever the first pathway is (overview in this case). Overview shouldnt be in the pathway!
Can anyone help me out debugging this issue?
Thanks in advance
Try to use /assets/images/picture.jpg.
Add / before the path. Then it will take /app/public/ as a root and be sure that the image will be at :
/app/public/assets/images/picture.jpg
Now wherever you want picture.jpg just pass this absolute path.
We serve favicons dynamically using an ExpressJS redirect, it works very well.
First, we retrieve the site object from memory with a quick lookup based on req.hostname, then send this response:
res.redirect(site.favicon);
The favicon variable could be a static asset on our server, or an asset on another server too. Our front-end code just calls /api/resources/favicon and it will receive the correct link in return.

What would be the correct approach for a light AngularJS web-app

I am building a very light Web-App using AngularJS, and i can't seem to find the correct approach as to how to organize it.
To explain it briefly, the App loads a list of objects after the user logs in, and when he choses an object it loads all the detail from that object.
The app (as I am currently building it) will only have to load short JSON text data, so I thought I could have a single page app in a single HTLM file, directed by a single controller who will handle all the data received from the server, and the different views would have been handled by using HTML snippets and AngularJS directives ng-show and ng-includ, like so :
<div ng-show="correctView" ng-include="login_snippet.html >
</div>
<div ng-show="correctView" ng-include="table-view_snippet.html >
</div>
<div ng-show="correctView" ng-include="detail_view_snippet.html >
</div>
The correctView string is changed by the controller to decide which view is to be showned.
Is this a reasonable approach ? I can't seem to find whick one would suit my App best; it doesn't seem to be the right thing to do because the previous button doesnt work with this method, which can't do.
So,
Is there a way to make it so the previous page button would work ?
If not, what would be the correct thing to do ?Is it possible to have several HTML files sharing the same controller ? Or can some controller send data to another ?
I only found examples of single page applications where only parts of the page is changed when the user interacts with it, and this can't do for mine.

Referencing images stored in object storage containers (Wirecloud) from img tag

We want to develop a widget to upload images to containers. This is a very well documented task:
1.- Object Storage Tutorial
2.- Fireware-Wiki
3.- OpenStack Object Storage Docs (Swift)
With all this you can manage to get (download), upload, delete files in a container. This is relatively clear.
On the other hand, we want to develop another widget to display images stored in a container. I think in something like this to show them:
<img src="public_object_url"/>
But I do not know how to do that. Where I get this public URL? Is there a public URL? Is it get in some step during the uploading process?
I am a bit lost how to do that. Any help would be highly appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
EDIT 1
We get blocked displaying images once they are downloaded.
A look inside "img" tags shows this:
what is the string returned by URL.createObjectURL(). If we look inside this link, the browser displays this:
We have decoded the string coming in the property "value" and the image is there!
To get the image from the object storage server we used a very similar code that the one used in the operator Álvaro recommended.
objectstorage.getFile( containerName,
reports[i].urlImagen,{
token: token,
onSuccess: onGetFileSuccess.bind(null, i),
onFailure: onGetFileFailure
});
function onGetFileSuccess(index, picture){
downloadedPicsCont--;
reports[index].urlImagen = URL.createObjectURL(picture);
if(!(downloadedPicsCont > 0)){
MashupPlatform.wiring.pushEvent('reports_output', JSON.stringify(reports));
}
}
The picture variable has the following structure, which seems to be ok too.
What is it happening?
EDIT 2
Finally, we found the reason. We were downloading images that were created directly from the cloud and not with objectStorageAPI. In you upload images from the cloud, when you download them you get them inside cdmi objects so the URL.createObjectURL doesn't not work as expected. In the other hand, if you upload them using objectStorageAPI, when downloading them, they come in raw format, so the method works correctly.
As far as I know, FIWARE Object Storage needs authentication, so there are no such public URL. But... you can download the image using your credentials and then use the URL.createObjectURL method for getting an URL usable in the src attribute of the img element.
It's a bit old, but you can use this operator as reference.

Inserting an image from local directory in thymeleaf spring framework (with maven)

I have developed a project using this link: https://spring.io/guides/gs/serving-web-content/ I used maven to develop above project.
I have two html files under this. abc.html and xyz.html. To insert images in the html page, I have used the url like this:
<img src="https://example.com/pic_mountain.jpg" alt="Mountain View" style="width:304px;height:228px">
But I want to use an image file located in my server instead. I tried placing the file in the same directory of html file but its not working. I even tried giving full path but of no use. This is an ubuntu OS. Please help me out here. Is there any place where I can configure the base path or basically how to put an image from my local folder.
I want you to look into the Thymeleaf's documentation of Standard URL Syntax and specifically the context-relative and server-relative url patterns.
Context-relative URL:
If you want to link resources inside your webapp then you should use
context relative urls. These are URLs which are supposed to be
relative to the web application root once it is installed on the
server. For example, if we deploy a myapp.war file into a Tomcat
server, our application will probably be accessible as
http://localhost:8080/myapp, and myapp will be the context name.
As JB Nizet the following will work for you as I have used thymeleaf personally in a webapp project,
<img th:src="#{/images/test.png}"/>
and the test.png should be under your project root inside the webapp folder. Something navigated through roughly like,
Myapp->webapp->images->test.png
Eg:
<img th:src="#{/resources/images/Picture.png}" />
Output as:
<img src="/resources/image/Picture.png" />
When you hit http://localhost:8080/myapp/resources/images/Picture.png in you browser then you should be able to access the image for the above syntax to work. And your resources folder will probably under webapp folder of your application.
Server-relative URL:
Server-relative URLs are very similar to context-relative URLs, except
they do not assume you want your URL to be linking to a resource
inside your application’s context, and therefore allow you to link to
a different context in the same server
Syntax:
<img th:src="#{~/billing-app/images/Invoice.png}">
Output as:
<a href="/billing-app/showDetails.htm">
The above image will be loaded from an application different from your context and if an application named billing-app is present in your server.
Sourced from: Thymeleaf documentation
You need to understand how HTTP works. When the browser loads a page at URL
http://some.host/myWebApp/foo/bar.html
and the HTML page contains
<img src="images/test.png"/>
the browser will send a second HTTP request to the server to load the image. The URL of the image, since the path is relative, will be http://some.host/myWebApp/foo/images/test.png. Note that the absolute path is composed from the current "directory" of the page, concatenated with the relative path of the image. The path of the server-side JSP or thymeleaf template is completely irrelevant here. What matters is the URL of the page, as displayed in the address bar of the browser. This URL is, in a typical Spring MVC application, the URL of the controller where the initial request was sent.
If the path of the image is absolute:
<img src="/myWebApp/images/test.png"/>
then the browser will send a second request to the URL http://some.host/myWebApp/images/test.png. The browser starts from the root of the web server, and concatenates the absolute path.
To be able to reference an image, whetever the URL of the page is, an absolute path is thus preferrable and easier to use.
In the above example, /myWebAppis the context path of the application, that you typically don't want to hard-code in the path, because it might change. Thankfully, according to the thymeleaf documentation, thymeleaf understands that and provides a syntax for context-relative paths, which thus transforms paths like /images/test.png into /myWebApp/images/test.png. So your image should look like
<img th:src="#{/images/test.png}"/>
(I've never used thymeleaf, but that's what I deduce from the documentation).
And the test.png image should thus be in a folder images located under the root of the webapp.
Get link on Internet:
String src = "https://example.com/image.jpg";
HTML: <img th:src="#{${src}}"/>
I have used bellow like..
My image path is like bellow..
I have used bellow code for loading image
<img th:src="#{imges/photo_male_6.jpg}" >
It is working fine for me.
Recently I had similar issue, but in my case, the spring security was making a problem. As mentioned in other answers and documentation:
<img th:src="#{/img/values.png}" alt="Media Resource"/>
should be enough. But since the spring security has been added to my project, I had to all /img/ ** for get Requests and add addResourceHandlers. Here is the code:
#Configuration
#EnableWebMvc
public class WebConfig extends WebMvcConfigurerAdapter {
#Override
public void addResourceHandlers(ResourceHandlerRegistry registry) {
registry.addResourceHandler(
"/webjars/**",
"/img/**",
"/css/**",
"/js/**")
.addResourceLocations(
"classpath:/META-INF/resources/webjars/",
"classpath:/static/img/",
"classpath:/static/css/",
"classpath:/static/js/");
}
#Override
protected void configure(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
http.csrf().disable();
http.sessionManagement().sessionCreationPolicy(SessionCreationPolicy.ALWAYS);
http.authorizeRequests().antMatchers(HttpMethod.GET, "/js/**", "/css/**", "/img/**" ,"/pressiplus", "/public/**", "/index", "/", "/login").permitAll();
http.authorizeRequests()
.antMatchers("/secure/admin/**").hasAnyRole("ADMIN","USER")
.antMatchers("/secure/admin/**").hasAnyRole("ADMIN")
.and()
.formLogin() //login configuration
.loginPage("/login")
.failureUrl("/login-error")
.loginProcessingUrl("/login")
.usernameParameter("email")
.passwordParameter("password")
.successHandler(myAuthenticationSuccessHandler())
.and()
.logout() //logout configuration
.logoutUrl("/logout")
.logoutSuccessHandler(myLogoutSuccessHandler)
.and()
.rememberMe()
.tokenRepository(persistentTokenRepository())
.tokenValiditySeconds(7 * 24 * 60 * 60) // expires in 7 days
.and()
.exceptionHandling() //exception handling configuration
.accessDeniedHandler(accessDeniedHandler());
}
}
I hope this helps someone in the future
Who retrieve link dynamically use this pattern
<img class="image" th:src="#{'/resources/images/avatars/'+${theUser.avatar}}" alt="Avatar">
if you use like this (${theUser.avatar}) it will add ? in above version link look like this: /resources/images/avatars/photoname.png
As DimaSan said here https://stackoverflow.com/a/40914668/12312156
You should set image src like this:
<img src="../static/img/signature.png" th:src="#{img/signature.png}"/>