ASP.NET MVC controller actions design

Question

I really like the way ASP.NET MVC works. I\'d love to implement it on all new web projects moving forward, but I hit a snag in a prototype the other day that I really haven\

Answer 1

I usually ditch the "Home" controller as the first thing in a project and replace it with a "Page" controller. I use that one for anything that is "just" a page. Things like "FAQ", "Contact Us", etc. I do this at least partially because the default approach to the Home controller requires a new method being added every time you need even a basic, static page.

In that controller, I only have the one action: Display. That action gives all of those pages the same context object. I actually store the content for those pages in the database with a lookup "slug" and tie it into NVelocity templating, but even just static HTML or NVelocity templates in files would work too.

Anything else, like the others said, gets split into controllers by the "thing" being managed. So, a ReportController, User or AccountController, CartController, etc. Then the actions make much more sense.

When you're talking about listing the registered users, it's actually a list of users, so I'd have a UserController and do /User/Display/Registered/MostRecent or something similar. For the registration itself, /User/Register which would post to /User/SaveRegistration which could, in turn, redirect to /User/DisplayProfile/NewUserID or /Page/Display/Home from there.

Answer 2

One mistake that newcomers to MVC make is to group actions into a controller for display reasons. In your case, instead of grouping the Register and ThankYou actions in with the homepage try separating them out into an AccountController as the MVC team has done in the sample project. You can use routing to set the Url's up however you want for the end-user.

As for your other actions, how about a ReportController? You could then additionally have an AdministrationController whose Index action/view contains links to various admin actions, including those on the ReportController.

Short Version: Group actions into a controller by function, not site navigation.

Answer 3

You can have as many controllers as makes sense; that layout looks reasonable. Note that routes don't have to map directly to {controller}/{action}, but it keeps things simple. Looks fine to me - except I'd probably have ThankYou as a view - i.e. the Register [GET] perhaps uses a different view to Register [POST]

Answer 4

You can always mix ASP.NET Web Forms with MVC.

Just add

routes.IgnoreRoute("Pages/{*path}");

to your routing table and add traditional Web form pages to Pages folder of the application.