Not able to add multiple HTML5 Viewers; workaround for GE-6521?
I think I'm having a similar problem as described here (https://support.geocortex.com/essentialsGSCForum?sub-nav=forum&main-nav=essentials&#!/feedtype=SINGLE_QUESTION_SEARCH_RESULT&id=90660000000CjwSAAS) , ("Post Installation fails to show the names..."). This identified bug has an issue ID of GE-6521.
I want to install a uniquely named Viewer in addition to the default Viewer, i.e. HTML5Viewer, AND HTML5Viewer_2, HTML5Viewer_3, etc. which is done in Post Installation.
The problem is that Post Installation changes all Viewer URLs to the last one entered, which results in not being able to select the correct Viewer in Geocortex Essentials Manager. We are running GE 4.10.0 and HTML5 Viewer 2.11.0.
Does anyone have a workaround for this?
0
-
Hi Nicholas,
Have a look in these two files :
C:\Program Files (x86)\Latitude Geographics\Geocortex Essentials\Default\REST Elements\Sites\Templates\Templates.xml
C:\Program Files (x86)\Latitude Geographics\Geocortex Essentials\Default\REST Elements\Manager\App_Data\RestManagerSettings.xml
the Post Installer will update these and you will likely find old or incorrect data in one or both. Take a backup copy and edit as required.
Regards,
Wayne Richard
Latitude Geographics Group Ltd.
Head Office: 300 – 1117 Wharf Street Victoria, BC Canada V8W 1T7
Tel: (250) 381-8130 | Fax: (250) 381-8132 | wrichard@latitudegeo.com
Developers of Geocortex web-based mapping software | www.geocortex.com
An Esri Platinum Business Partner0 -
Hi Wayne,
I've manually edited both files, by changing the 'TemplateID' and the 'Url' attribute values. It appears that edits to RestManagerSettings.xml results in the associated URL showing up in Manager; Viewers>Viewer URLs. However, editing Templates.xml does not seem to alter the templates available in the 'Add Viewer' utility on the Viewers page in Manager, i.e. the available templates, or the URL, in the dropdown list don't update. They seem to continue to reference the single Viewer.
Is there a way to rename the viewer .vte file so when I add it in Post Installation, the template ID in the Template.xml file will be unique? I mean, I have renamed it, but it still shows up as 'Viewer for HTML5 2.11.0' in Post Installation, Configure Viewer Templates.0 -
Hi Nicholas,
The Template.xml changes that you made will affect the list in the Post Installer, the RestManagerSettings.xml changes will affect what you see in Essentials Manager. Yes, you can have multiple templates. I would copy the file, rename it and then run the Post Installer to make sure it appears. I would not have multiple copies of different versions of viewer. You can only use 1 management pack at a time and the management pack often varies between versions. If you get stuck, feel free to open a support ticket, it might be easier to wrap it up on a screenshare.
Regards,
Wayne0 -
You shouldn't just rename the .vte file and install it through the PostInstaller because it will add another viewer with the same display name. Rename the .vte file as .zip, unzip it, edit the template.xml file and update the DisplayName, DefaultVirtualDirectory and Description parameters (and optionally the LaunchUrl if you want to change it) to reflect what the new viewer should be called. Save the template.xml, put it back into the .zip file, rename the .zip to .vte, then run the PostInstaller and add the new template.
We have done this with almost every version of Essentials and it works well.0 -
Hi Peter,
I've completed your suggested workaround in my development environment and it appears to accomplish the task of adding a new viewer.
I checked the Templates.xml and RestManagerSettings.xml files after running Post Installation and they look to have been successfully updated. My testing shows that editing the TemplateID parameter (in addition to the parameters you specified) in the Template.xml results in a separate template with its own URL in Manager, while using a common (or default) TemplateID name results in a grouping of the Launch URLs. I mention this since it may be preferable to have it one way or the other, which we will have to decide going forward with production deployment.
Thanks for providing this workaround.
Nicholas0
Du måste logga in om du vill lämna en kommentar.
Kommentarer
5 kommentarer