Skip to main content

Navigation Settings in SharePoint 2013 Site Definitions

Who likes creating SharePoint site definitions from scratch? Well, it's not my favorite part of the SharePoint development either. An initially good idea of setting up your whole site through an XML file, received implementation and support far from being perfect. That quickly lead developers to look for alternative ways of defining and provisioning sites, primarily through the SharePoint API. A simple ONET.XML with beefy code-packed features became de-facto standard. What was supposed to be a template became compiled code. I was hoping SharePoint 2013 would at least attempt to do something about it…

Tasked with creating a few publishing portal site definitions, I was unpleasantly surprised to find out that any attempt to use my new site definition to provision a site collection root results in both Global and Current Navigation switched to "Managed Navigation" mode, while I needed it to stay in the good old "Structural Navigation" one. This mode is new to SharePoint navigation, so in hopes that Microsoft did not forget about the ONET.XML admirers, I went to look at the Portal Navigation Properties feature, a.k.a. "541F5F57-C847-4e16-B59A-B31E90E6F9EA". You typically use it to affect navigation settings in a following manner:

<!-- Per-Web Portal Navigation Properties -->
<Feature ID="541F5F57-C847-4e16-B59A-B31E90E6F9EA">
 <Properties xmlns="
http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/">
  <Property Key="InheritGlobalNavigation" Value="true"/>
  <Property Key="InheritCurrentNavigation" Value="true"/>
  <Property Key="IncludeSubSites" Value="true"/>
  <Property Key="ShowSiblings" Value="true"/>
  <Property Key="IncludePages" Value="false"/>
 </Properties>
</Feature>


Those property keys have never been explicitly documented on MSDN, but anyone who ever created a site definition is pretty familiar with them, thanks to numerous blogs and standard SharePoint site definitions. I assumed that with the introduction of a new navigation mode, a new property to switch between the two would also be provided in the latest version of the Portal Navigation Properties feature. The only sure way to find out was to look into the source of Microsoft.SharePoint.Publishing.dll, as it contains the feature's event receivers. Indeed, it turned out to expect over a dozen properties:

InheritGlobalNavigationbool
InheritCurrentNavigationbool
ShowSiblingsbool
IncludeSubSitesbool
IncludePagesbool
GlobalIncludeSubSitesbool
GlobalIncludePagesbool
CurrentIncludeSubSitesbool
CurrentIncludePagesbool
GlobalDynamicChildLimitint
CurrentDynamicChildLimitint
OrderingMethodEnum: "Automatic", "ManualWithAutomaticPageSorting", "Manual"
AutomaticSortingMethodEnum: "Title", "CreatedDate", "LastModifiedDate"
SortAscendingbool
IncludeInGlobalNavigationbool
IncludeInCurrentNavigation   bool

That's definitely more than I knew about, but not helpful in my particular case. Why does it switch to "Managed Navigation" mode? The answer was at the very end of the feature receiver code:

if (publishingWeb.Web.Site.CompatibilityLevel >= 15)
{
     FriendlyUrlUtilities.ActivateManagedNavigation(publishingWeb.Web);
}


That's it - if your site is SharePoint 2013-compatible (which it certainly is), you get switched to "Managed Navigation" unconditionally, and there's nothing you can do about it! This is where I realized that nothing really changed in Microsoft's perception of ONET.XML, and went back to frankensteining my site definitions with code by creating a feature to set the navigation mode through API:

public override void FeatureActivated(SPFeatureReceiverProperties properties)
{
    SPWeb web = properties.Feature.Parent as SPWeb;

    WebNavigationSettings navigationSettings =
                           new WebNavigationSettings(web);
    navigationSettings.GlobalNavigation.Source =

                           StandardNavigationSource.PortalProvider;
    navigationSettings.CurrentNavigation.Source =

                           StandardNavigationSource.PortalProvider;
    navigationSettings.Update();
    web.Update();
}


Happy SharePointing…

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SharePoint 2013 and "search scopes"

While SharePoint 2013 introduced some undeniably handy features in the content discovery department, some of the old functionality has changed so much that you'll have to forget many of the design tricks that worked in 2007 and 2010.  One of such pain points is deprecating search scopes in SharePoint 2013. The requirement Let's start with a trivial situation. You have a requirement that states: "A user should be able to perform different types of search from any page/sub site on the portal by selecting a type of search and specifying keyword(s)". This would be considered an out-of-box functionality in 2007/2010: you just enable search scopes dropdown (considering the search box control is already in the master page), and define scopes. Piece of cake! Well, not so much in 2013.   The problem The thing is - there's no search scopes in SharePoint 2013. OK, to be exact - there's no user-definable search scopes, as we still have a couple of built-in ...

What's in your cart?

Let's say, you've added product A to your shopping cart. Then you get back to the product details page and add product A again. What's going to happen? You will still have one line in your cart, but the quantity of product A will be equal two . This is a standard behavior of B2C shopping carts, including the Sitecore Commerce 9 ones. Now, imagine that your business processes require a bit more complicated scenarios, where you might want to actually create two lines in the cart, and avoid rolling them up into a single one. It is much more common than you might think. For example, you are buying two toasters of the same make and model, but you want only one of them gift-wrapped. Or you buy two pairs of glasses belonging to the same SKU, but you want to specify different prescriptions for them. Obviously, you do not want to roll them up under a single cart line. What does Sitecore Experience Commerce 9 provide you with in order to handle such scenarios? Let's take ...