Using Polymer, I learned to understand well the difference between light DOM (whatever is in the element) and local DOM (the "hidden" side of the story).
<iron-form> (which is used like <form is="iron-form"></form>) is a little different as it doesn't have local DOM.
Now I have a custom-made widget (which is actually available in GitHub) where you go:
<hot-form-validator success-message="Record saved!">
<form is="iron-form" id="form" method="post" action="/stores/polymer">
<paper-input required id="name" name="name" label="Your name"></paper-input>
<paper-input required id="surname" name="surname" label="Your surname"></paper-input>
<paper-button type="submit" raised on-click="_submit">Click!</paper-button>
</form>
</hot-form-validator>
Now, hot-form-validator needs to get the form, and then look -- within the form -- for a specific button (with type=submit). So, I have:
(remember that this.form is the form):
attached: function(){
var paperButton = this.form.$$('paper-button[type=submit]');
...
}
It works, but it doesn't make sense that it does since $$ should be only for local DOM, whereas paper-button is actually in the form's light DOM.
attached: function(){
var paperButton = this.form.queryEffectiveChildren('paper-button[type=submit]');
This works, but I wonder if it's the best way to go.
Or... since there is no shadow DOM, should I simply no bother worrying about all this, and simply use DOM as always since there is no light/local DOM to deal with?
See https://www.polymer-project.org/1.0/docs/devguide/local-dom#light-dom-children
If you add an id to the <content id="someId"></content> then you can use
var result = this.getContentChildren('#someId');
and then look up the desired element in the result.
You could for example create a specific <content> tag for the submit button like
<dom-module ...>
<template>
...
<content></content>
<content id="submitButton" select="paper-button[type=submit]"></content>
...
</template>
</dom-module>
and then get the element using
var submitButton = this.getContentChildren('#submitButton')[0];
This code is working
this.form.$$('paper-button[type=submit]');
because this.$$ forwards to querySelectorAll(...) and in shady DOM encapsulation is just emulated and doesn't prevent querySelectorAll(...) to find other children than local DOM children.
You can also use
var submitButton = Polymer.dom(this).querySelector('paper-button[type=submit]');
Related
I am experiencing odd behavior when data linking an object to a form that led me to re-question what exactly is being data bound?
Basically I have a form that creates new Companies as well as updates them. The actual creation/update is done via ajax, which is why I am using the same form for both purposes. In the case when I have to create a company, everything works as I expect. However when I have to update a company, things don't work like how I expect them to. Please have a look at the following code.
Here is my sample Form HTML:
<div id="result"></div>
<script type="text/x-jsrender" id="CompanyFormTemplate">
<form>
<input type="text" data-link="Company.Name" />
</form>
</script>
Here is my Javascript code:
var app = new CompanyFormContext();
function CompanyFormContext() {
this.Company = {
Name: ''
};
this.setCompany = function (company) {
if (company) {
$.observable(this).setProperty('Company', company);
}
};
};
$(function () {
initPage();
...
if (...) {
// we need to update company information
app.setCompany({ Name: 'Company ABC' });
}
});
function initPage() {
var template = $.templates('#CompanyFormTemplate');
template.link("#result", app);
}
Instead of the form input showing 'Company ABC', it is empty. However if I enter anything in it, then the Company.Name value does change! But while I want the input to data bind to Name property of my Company object, I also want it to be aware of any changes made to the (parent) Company object and update it's data binding to it's Name property accordingly.
So my question is how should I change the way I am writing this code so that I can achieve a data bound both on the root object as well as the property?
The issue you were having was because in your scenario, you have paths like Company.Name for which you want to data-link to changes not only of the leaf property but also to changes involving replacing objects higher up in the path (in this case the Company).
For that you need to use the syntax data-link="Company^Path".
See the section Paths: leaf changes or deep changes in this documentation topic:
http://www.jsviews.com/#observe#deep.
See also the examples such as Example: JsViews with plain objects and array in this topic: http://www.jsviews.com/#explore/objectsorvm.
Here is an update of your jsfiddle, using that syntax: https://jsfiddle.net/msd5oov9/2/.
BTW, FWIW, in your fix using {^{for}} you didn't have to use a second template - you could alternatively have written:
<form class="form-horizontal">
{^{for Company}}
...
<input type="text" data-link="Name" />
{{/for}}
</form>
To respond also to your follow-up question in your comment below, you can associate any 'block' tag with a template. Using tmpl=... on the tag means you have decided to separate what would have been the block content into a separate re-usable template. (A 'partial', if you will). The data context for that template will be the same as it would have been within the block.
So specifically, {{include}} {{if}} and {{else}} tags do not move the data context, but {{for}} and {{props}} do. With custom tags you can decide...
So in your case you could use either {^{for Company tmpl=.../}} or {{include tmpl=.../}} but in the second case your other template that you reference would use <input type="text" data-link="Company^Name" /> rather than <input type="text" data-link="Name" />.
Here are some relevant links:
http://www.jsviews.com/#samples/jsr/composition/tmpl
http://www.jsviews.com/#includetag
http://www.jsviews.com/#fortag
I discovered one way to achieve this. It might seem complex at first but it will make sense once you understand it properly.
(PS: I wish there was a sample like this. I might just blog about it.)
HTML Markup:
<script type="text/x-jsrender" id="CompanyFormTemplate">
<form>
{^{for Company tmpl="#CompanyDetailsTemplate" /}
</form>
</script>
<script type="text/x-jsrender" id="CompanyDetailsTemplate">
<input type="text" data-link="Name" />
</script>
Javascript: No changes needed from code above.
Okay so as I said, the solution might look complicated but it turns out all I really had to do was to set up data binding first on the Company object, and then to it's property objects. I wonder if there is a more elegant solution (i.e. one in which all of this can be achieved in a single template) however this solution ensures that data-binding is happening both on the parent object as well as its' properties.
I have posted a JsFiddle for this solution, so if anyone comes across this problem and wants to understand how this solution would work for their particular problem, they will be able to play with a working solution.
I have a polymer paper-input element on HTML page (among other webcomponents). I need to listen on it’s value change and modify another webcomponent’s property. For a sake of simplicity, let’s imagine I need two syncronized inputs. So far, I have:
<paper-input id="fst" label="First" floatinglabel="First"></paper-input>
<paper-input id="snd" label="Second" floatinglabel="Second"></paper-input>
I want to have their values to be synchronized all the way. Currently I use following code to achieve this:
document.addEventListener('polymer-ready', function() {
['#fst', '#snd'].forEach(function(el) {
document.querySelector(el).addEventListener("change", function(e) {
var value = document.querySelector(el).value;
// ⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓ in pseudocode: other element
document.querySelector(XOR(el)).setAttribute('value', value);
});
});
...
});
I definitely see this is ugly. I am sure, there is a proper way to achieve the goal, but I failed to google it and I’m totally stuck. I suppose observes should do the trick, but I simply can’t figure out how.
The evident code using binding variable is not working for some reason:
<paper-input id="fst" label="First" floatinglabel="First" value="{{ value }}">
</paper-input>
<paper-input id="snd" label="Second" floatinglabel="Second" value="{{ value }}">
</paper-input>
Thanks in advance.
you could use the declarative method and just use something like
<template is="auto-binding">
<paper-input id="fst" label="First" floatinglabel="First" value="{{value}}"></paper-input>
<paper-input id="snd" label="Second" floatinglabel="Second" value="{{value}}"></paper-input>
</template>
plunker shows it in action
http://plnkr.co/edit/3cxdOYKciKRBzROHQzgM?p=preview
edit: update answer to reflect that the use of declarative binding outside a custom element requires a auto-binding template. also it is worth noting that elements inside the auto-binding template are not accessible until the template-bound event is fired.
Since Angular-UI-Mask is acting oddly, I'm using jquery-inputmask to some of my inputs, but when an input is dynamically inserted ny Angular it gets no mask:
<li ng-repeat="item in items">
<input type="text" name="birth_date" class="span2 format_date" ng-model="birth_date" placeholder="Data de Nascimento" required />
</li>
This is the related script
<script type="text/javascript">
jQuery(document).ready(function(){
$(".format_date").inputmask("99/99/9999");
});
</script>
Is there anything I can do to force it to set the mask to new inputs?
jQuery plugins like jQuery.inputMask work by (as your code shows) attaching behaviour to DOM elements when the document is 'ready'. This will run once, and never again, so for dynamically-added content this approach doesn't work.
Instead, you need something that will run whenever the corresponding DOM is changed. So whenever an 'item' in your 'items' list is added, the element is added and the corresponding jQuery function is run against that element. You need to use AngularJS for this and you could write your own directive, but thankfully, someone has already written the code for you: the jQuery Passthrough plugin as part of Angular UI's UI.Utils.
Here is a working Plunkr.
You need to include the script at the top, like so (I downloaded it from GitHub):
<script src="ui-utils.jq.js"></script>
Load the module into AngularJS, for example:
var app = angular.module('myApp', ['ui.jq']);
And then use the directive in your HTML markup:
<input type="text" ui-jq="inputmask" ui-options="'99/99/9999', { 'placeholder': 'dd/mm/yyyy' }" />
Am trying to chache DOM using namespace but when I call I get "undefined" instead of jQuery object
<form id="create_profile">
<input type="text" name="name"/>
<input type="text" name="email" />
<input type="text" name="password" />
<input type="text" name="passwordconfirm" />
<span onclick="profile.create()">valider</span>
</form>
Js:
var profile = {
create: function(){
alert(profileFields.test); // show done!
alert(profileFields.create_form.attr('id')); // show undefined instead of create_profil
}
}
var profileFields = {
test: "done!",
create_form: $("#create_profile"),
$email: $("input[name='name']", this.create_form),
$password: $("input[name='pass']", this.create_form),
$passwordconfirm: $("input[name='passconfirm']", this.create_form),
$name: $("input[name='email']", this.create_form),
$tel: $("input[name='tel']",this.create_form)
}
This tells us that your JavaScript code is running before that element exists, so $("#create_profile") returns an empty jQuery object. Calling attr on an empty jQuery object returns undefined. If your script tag is higher up in the HTML than the elements it refers to, the elements won't exist as of when the script runs.
Either
Put the script tag at the very end of the HTML, just before the closing </body> tag, or
Use jQuery's ready to hold up execution of your code until "DOM ready."
#1 is preferred unless you don't control where the script tag goes. More:
Best Practices for Speeding Up Your Web Site
Google Closure engineers on when DOM elements are ready for scripting
You probably simply did not wait until the DOM was ready.
Wrap your code in:
$(function () {
//your code
});
Problem: Sometimes you will want to access a component from javascript with
getElementById, but id's are generated dynamically in JSF, so you
need a method of getting an objects id. I answer below on how you can do this.
Original Question:
I want to use some code like below. How can I reference the inputText JSF component in my Javascript?
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
xmlns:h="http://java.sun.com/jsf/html"
xmlns:f="http://java.sun.com/jsf/core">
<head>
<title>Input Name Page</title>
<script type="javascript" >
function myFunc() {
// how can I get the contents of the inputText component below
alert("Your email address is: " + document.getElementById("emailAddress").value);
}
</script>
</head>
<h:body>
<f:view>
<h:form>
Please enter your email address:<br/>
<h:inputText id="emailAddresses" value="#{emailAddresses.emailAddressesStr}"/>
<h:commandButton onclick="myFunc()" action="results" value="Next"/>
</h:form>
</f:view>
</h:body>
</html>
Update: this post Client Identifiers in JSF2.0 discusses using a technique like:
<script type="javascript" >
function myFunc() {
alert("Your email address is: " + document.getElementById("#{myInptTxtId.clientId}").value);
}
</script>
<h:inputText id="myInptTxtId" value="backingBean.emailAddress"/>
<h:commandButton onclick="myFunc()" action="results" value="Next"/>
Suggesting that the attribute id on the inputText component
creates an object that can be accessed with EL using #{myInptTxtId},
in the above example. The article goes on to state that JSF 2.0 adds
the zero-argument getClientId() method to the UIComponent class.
Thereby allowing the #{myInptTxtId.clientId} construct suggested
above to get the actual generated id of the component.
Though in my tests this doesn't work. Can anyone else confirm/deny.
The answers suggested below suffer from drawback that the above
technique doesn't. So it would be good to know if the above technique
actually works.
You need to use exactly the ID as JSF has assigned in the generated HTML output. Rightclick the page in your webbrowser and choose View Source. That's exactly the HTML code which JS sees (you know, JS runs in webbrowser and intercepts on HTML DOM tree).
Given a
<h:form>
<h:inputText id="emailAddresses" ... />
It'll look something like this:
<form id="j_id0">
<input type="text" id="j_id0:emailAddress" ... />
Where j_id0 is the generated ID of the generated HTML <form> element.
You'd rather give all JSF NamingContainer components a fixed id so that JSF don't autogenerate them. The <h:form> is one of them.
<h:form id="formId">
<h:inputText id="emailAddresses" value="#{emailAddresses.emailAddressesStr}"/>
This way the form won't get an autogenerated ID like j_id0 and the input field will get a fixed ID of formId:emailAddress. You can then just reference it as such in JS.
var input = document.getElementById('formId:emailAddress');
From that point on you can continue using JS code as usual. E.g. getting value via input.value.
See also:
How to select JSF components using jQuery?
Update as per your update: you misunderstood the blog article. The special #{component} reference refers to the current component where the EL expression is been evaluated and this works only inside any of the attributes of the component itself. Whatever you want can also be achieved as follows:
var input = document.getElementById('#{emailAddress.clientId}');
with (note the binding to the view, you should absolutely not bind it to a bean)
<h:inputText binding="#{emailAddress}" />
but that's plain ugly. Better use the following approach wherein you pass the generated HTML DOM element as JavaScript this reference to the function
<h:inputText onclick="show(this)" />
with
function show(input) {
alert(input.value);
}
If you're using jQuery, you can even go a step further by abstracting them using a style class as marker interface
<h:inputText styleClass="someMarkerClass" />
with
$(document).on("click", ".someMarkerClass", function() {
var $input = $(this);
alert($input.val());
});
Answer: So this is the technique I'm happiest with. Doesn't require doing too much weird stuff to figure out the id of a component. Remember the whole point of this is so you can know the id of a component from anywhere on your page, not just from the actual component itself. This is key. I press a button, launch javascript function, and it should be able to access any other component, not just the one that launched it.
This solution doesn't require any 'right-click' and see what the id is. That type of solution is brittle, as the id is dynamically generated and if I change the page I'll have to go through that nonsense each time.
Bind the component to a backing bean.
Reference the bound component wherever you want.
So here is a sample of how that can be done.
Assumptions: I have an *.xhtml page (could be *.jsp) and I have defined a backing bean. I'm also using JSF 2.0.
*.xhtml page
<script>
function myFunc() {
var inputText = document.getElementById("#{backBean.emailAddyInputText.clientId}")
alert("The email address is: " + inputText.value );
}
</script>
<h:inputText binding="#{backBean.emailAddyInputText}"/>
<h:commandButton onclick="myFunc()" action="results" value="Next"/>
BackBean.java
UIInput emailAddyInputText;
Make sure to create your getter/setter for this property too.
Id is dynamically generated, so you should define names for all parent elements to avoid j_id123-like ids.
Note that if you use jQuery to select element - than you should use double slash before colon:
jQuery("my-form-id\\:my-text-input-block\\:my-input-id")
instead of:
jQuery("my-form-id:my-text-input-block:my-input-id")
In case of Richfaces you can use el expression on jsf page:
#{rich:element('native-jsf-input-id')}
to select javascript element, for example:
#{rich:element('native-jsf-input-id')}.value = "Enter something here";
You can view the HTML source when this is generated and see what the id is set to, so you can use that in your JavaScript. As it's in a form it is probably prepending the form id to it.
I know this is not the JSF way but if you want to avoid the ID pain you can set a special CSS class for the selector. Just make sure to use a good name so that when someone reads the class name it is clear that it was used for this purpose.
<h:inputText id="emailAddresses" class="emailAddressesForSelector"...
In your JavaScript:
jQuery('.emailAddressesForSelector');
Of course you would still have to manually manage class name uniqueness.
I do think this is maintainable as long as you do not use this in reusable components. In that case you could generate the class names using a convention.
<h:form id="myform">
<h:inputText id="name" value="#{beanClass.name}"
a:placeholder="Enter Client Title"> </h:inputText>
</h:form>
This is a small example of jsf. Now I will write javascript code to get the value of the above jsf component:
var x = document.getElementById('myform:name').value; //here x will be of string type
var y= parseInt(x,10); //here we converted x into Integer type and can do the
//arithmetic operations as well