Simple .NET/ASP.NET PDF document editor web control SDK

The first interesting item in listing 10.14 is the link element linking to our CSS file. It uses the familiar tilde (~) notation to note the base directory of our website, instead of relative path notation (..\..\). We can rebase our website and redefine what the tilde means in our Spark configuration if need be. This method is helpful in web farm or content-delivery network (CDN) scenarios. The next interesting item is our familiar Html.ActionLink calls, but this time we enclose the code in the ${} syntax. This syntax is synonymous with the <%= %> syntax of Web Forms, but if we place an exclamation point after the dollar sign, using $!{} instead, any NullReferenceExceptions will have empty content instead of an error screen. This is one advantage of Spark over Web Forms, where a null results in an error for the end user, even though missing values are normal. The last interesting piece of our layout is the <use content="view"/> element. The named content section, view, defaults to the view name from our action. In our example, this would be an Index.spark file in a Product folder. We can create other named content sections for a header, footer, sidebar, and anything else we might need in our base layout. We can nest our layouts as much as our application demands, just as we can with master pages. With the layout in place, we can create our action-specific view, as shown in listing 10.15.

microsoft reporting services qr code, ssrs upc-a, vb.net print barcode zebra, ssrs ean 128, ssrs ean 13, ssrs pdf 417, c# remove text from pdf, replace text in pdf using itextsharp in c#, ssrs fixed data matrix, c# remove text from pdf,

to exactly one item at the first In C#, the entity at the 1 end would have a navigation property that offers a collection, in order to provide access to the many end The entity at the * end would provide a simpler noncollection property to get back to the one entity it is related to A variation on this theme has 0.1 instead of 1 at the first end, and * at the second end as before This is similar to a one-to-many relationship, except items at the many end don t necessarily have to be related to an item at the other end For example, you might want to represent the relationship between managers and their reports But if you go far enough up the corporate hierarchy, you will find someone who has no manager the navigation property would return null.

So a simple one-to-many relationship doesn t work here you would need 0.1 instead of 1 at the manager end of the association Sometimes one-to-one relationships crop up each item at one end is always related to exactly one item at the other end This is an unusual kind of relationship because it implies that entities are inextricably and exclusively linked Relationships that sound like they might be one-to-one are often not Here s an illustration from popular culture, describing a relationship between a master and an apprentice expressed as: Always two, there are No more, no less A master, and an apprentice A master always has an apprentice, an apprentice always has a master, so isn t that a one-to-one relationship In fact, this might need to be a one-to-many relationship because on the death of an apprentice, the master takes a new apprentice.

<viewdata model="SparkViewExample.Models.Product[]" /> Declares type <var styles="new [] {'even', 'odd'}" /> of model Defines array <h2>Products</h2> of CSS classes <table> <tr> <th>Name</th> <th>Price</th> <th>Description</th> </tr> <var i="0"> <tr each="var product in ViewData.Model" class="${styles[i%2]}"> <td>${product.Name}</td> <td>${product.Price}</td> <td>${product.Description}</td> Loops over <set i="i+1" /> product collection </tr> </var> </table>

(The apprentice has just one master, as the only career paths are promotion to master or untimely death So we can at least be sure that this is not a many-to-many relationship) The constraint expressed here is merely that the master has a one-at-a-time approach to relationships, much like serial monogamy (For example, both Darth Maul and Darth Vader were apprentices of Darth Sidious) So if the database needs to reflect the full history rather than just the current state, a one-to-one relationship won t be sufficient (Although if you only need the database to store the current state, one-to-one might be fine here) In databases, oneto-one relationships often exist because information about a single entity has been split across multiple tables, perhaps for performance reasons.

(The EF lets you map this back to a single entity in the conceptual model, so such relationships are likely to be more common in the store schema than the conceptual schema) Variations on one-to-one where one or the other end is optional can be useful For example, you might have an entity representing a customer and an entity representing an account An organization (such as a butcher shop) might choose to have a policy where customers are not required to have accounts, but where accounts are held any single customer can have only one account, and accounts must be held by exactly one customer (That s not the only imaginable policy, of course) The relationship between.

Working with the grid layout . ......................................................................................... 176 Styling your site .

Yoda discussing Sith terms of employment, from Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace. Opinion is divided on whether this variant can still be called one-to-one. Strictly speaking it s incorrect, but in practice you ll see one-to-zero-or-one relationships widely described informally as one-to-one.