I have some JavaScript code that works in IE containing the following:
myElement.innerText = "foo";
However, it seems that the 'innerText' property does not work in Firefox. Is there some Firefox equivalent? Or is there a more generic, cross browser property that can be used?
Update: I wrote a blog post detailing all the differences much better.
Firefox uses W3C standard Node::textContent, but its behavior differs "slightly" from that of MSHTML's proprietary innerText (copied by Opera as well, some time ago, among dozens of other MSHTML features).
First of all, textContent whitespace representation is different from innerText one. Second, and more importantly, textContent includes all of SCRIPT tag contents, whereas innerText doesn't.
Just to make things more entertaining, Opera - besides implementing standard textContent - decided to also add MSHTML's innerText but changed it to act as textContent - i.e. including SCRIPT contents (in fact, textContent and innerText in Opera seem to produce identical results, probably being just aliased to each other).
textContent is part of Node interface, whereas innerText is part of HTMLElement. This, for example, means that you can "retrieve" textContent but not innerText from text nodes:
var el = document.createElement('p');
var textNode = document.createTextNode('x');
el.textContent; // ""
el.innerText; // ""
textNode.textContent; // "x"
textNode.innerText; // undefined
Finally, Safari 2.x also has buggy innerText implementation. In Safari, innerText functions properly only if an element is
neither hidden (via style.display == "none") nor orphaned from the document. Otherwise, innerText results in an empty string.
I was playing with textContent abstraction (to work around these deficiencies), but it turned out to be rather complex.
You best bet is to first define your exact requirements and follow from there. It is often possible to simply strip tags off of innerHTML of an element, rather than deal with all of the possible textContent/innerText deviations.
Another possibility, of course, is to walk the DOM tree and collect text nodes recursively.
Firefox uses the W3C-compliant textContent property.
I'd guess Safari and Opera also support this property.
If you only need to set text content and not retrieve, here's a trivial DOM version you can use on any browser; it doesn't require either the IE innerText extension or the DOM Level 3 Core textContent property.
function setTextContent(element, text) {
while (element.firstChild!==null)
element.removeChild(element.firstChild); // remove all existing content
element.appendChild(document.createTextNode(text));
}
jQuery provides a .text() method that can be used in any browser. For example:
$('#myElement').text("Foo");
As per Prakash K's answer Firefox does not support the innerText property. So you can simply test whether the user agent supports this property and proceed accordingly as below:
function changeText(elem, changeVal) {
if (typeof elem.textContent !== "undefined") {
elem.textContent = changeVal;
} else {
elem.innerText = changeVal;
}
}
A really simple line of Javascript can get the "non-taggy" text in all main browsers...
var myElement = document.getElementById('anyElementId');
var myText = (myElement.innerText || myElement.textContent);
Note that the Element::innerText property will not contain the text which has been hidden by CSS style "display:none" in Google Chrome (as well it will drop the content that has been masked by other CSS technics (including font-size:0, color:transparent, and a few other similar effects that cause the text not to be rendered in any visible way).
Other CSS properties are also considered :
First the "display:" style of inner elements is parsed to determine if it delimits a block content (such as "display:block" which is the default of HTML block elements in the browser's builtin stylesheet, and whose behavior as not been overriden by your own CSS style); if so a newline will be inserted in the value of the innerText property. This won't happen with the textContent property.
The CSS properties that generate inline contents will also be considered : for example the inline element <br \> that generates an inline newline will also generate an newline in the value of innerText.
The "display:inline" style causes no newline either in textContent or innerText.
The "display:table" style generates newlines around the table and between table rows, but"display:table-cell" will generate a tabulation character.
The "position:absolute" property (used with display:block or display:inline, it does not matter) will also cause a line break to be inserted.
Some browsers will also include a single space separation between spans
But Element::textContent will still contain ALL contents of inner text elements independantly of the applied CSS even if they are invisible. And no extra newlines or whitespaces will be generated in textContent, which just ignores all styles and the structure and inline/block or positioned types of inner elements.
A copy/paste operation using mouse selection will discard the hidden text in the plain-text format that is put in the clipboard, so it won't contain everything in the textContent, but only what is within innerText (after whitespace/newline generation as above).
Both properties are then supported in Google Chrome, but their content may then be different. Older browsers still included in innetText everything like what textContent now contains (but their behavior in relation with then generation of whitespaces/newlines was inconsistant).
jQuery will solve these inconsistencies between browsers using the ".text()" method added to the parsed elements it returns via a $() query. Internally, it solves the difficulties by looking into the HTML DOM, working only with the "node" level. So it will return something looking more like the standard textContent.
The caveat is that that this jQuery method will not insert any extra spaces or line breaks that may be visible on screen caused by subelements (like <br />) of the content.
If you design some scripts for accessibility and your stylesheet is parsed for non-aural rendering, such as plugins used to communicate with a Braille reader, this tool should use the textContent if it must include the specific punctuation signs that are added in spans styled with "display:none" and that are typically included in pages (for example for superscripts/subscripts), otherwise the innerText will be very confusive on the Braille reader.
Texts hidden by CSS tricks are now typically ignored by major search engines (that will also parse the CSS of your HTML pages, and will also ignore texts that are not in contrasting colors on the background) using an HTML/CSS parser and the DOM property "innerText" exactly like in modern visual browsers (at least this invisible content will not be indexed so hidden text cannot be used as a trick to force the inclusion of some keywords in the page to check its content) ; but this hidden text will be stil displayed in the result page (if the page was still qualified from the index to be included in results), using the "textContent" property instead of the full HTML to strip the extra styles and scripts.
IF you assign some plain-text in any one of these two properties, this will overwrite the inner markup and styles applied to it (only the assigned element will keep its type, attributes and styles), so both properties will then contain the same content. However, some browsers will now no longer honor the write to innerText, and will only let you overwrite the textContent property (you cannot insert HTML markup when writing to these properties, as HTML special characters will be properly encoded using numeric character references to appear literally, if you then read the innerHTML property after the assignment of innerText or textContent.
myElement.innerText = myElement.textContent = "foo";
Edit (thanks to Mark Amery for the comment below): Only do it this way if you know beyond a reasonable doubt that no code will be relying on checking the existence of these properties, like (for example) jQuery does. But if you are using jQuery, you would probably just use the "text" function and do $('#myElement').text('foo') as some other answers show.
innerText has been added to Firefox and should be available in the FF45 release: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=264412
A draft spec has been written and is expected to be incorporated into the HTML living standard in the future: http://rocallahan.github.io/innerText-spec/, https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/465
Note that currently the Firefox, Chrome and IE implementations are all incompatible. Going forward, we can probably expect Firefox, Chrome and Edge to converge while old IE remains incompatible.
See also: https://github.com/whatwg/compat/issues/5
This has been my experience with innerText, textContent, innerHTML, and value:
// elem.innerText = changeVal; // works on ie but not on ff or ch
// elem.setAttribute("innerText", changeVal); // works on ie but not ff or ch
// elem.textContent = changeVal; // works on ie but not ff or ch
// elem.setAttribute("textContent", changeVal); // does not work on ie ff or ch
// elem.innerHTML = changeVal; // ie causes error - doesn't work in ff or ch
// elem.setAttribute("innerHTML", changeVal); //ie causes error doesn't work in ff or ch
elem.value = changeVal; // works in ie and ff -- see note 2 on ch
// elem.setAttribute("value", changeVal); // ie works; see note 1 on ff and note 2 on ch
ie = internet explorer, ff = firefox, ch = google chrome.
note 1: ff works until after value is deleted with backspace - see note by Ray Vega above.
note 2: works somewhat in chrome - after update it is unchanged then you click away and click back into the field and the value appears.
The best of the lot is elem.value = changeVal; which I did not comment out above.
As in 2016 from Firefox v45, innerText works on firefox, take a look at its support: http://caniuse.com/#search=innerText
If you want it to work on previous versions of Firefox, you can use textContent, which has better support on Firefox but worse on older IE versions: http://caniuse.com/#search=textContent
What about something like this?
//$elem is the jQuery object passed along.
var $currentText = $elem.context.firstChild.data.toUpperCase();
** I needed to make mine uppercase.
Just reposting from comments under the original post. innerHTML works in all browsers. Thanks stefita.
myElement.innerHTML = "foo";
found this here:
<!--[if lte IE 8]>
<script type="text/javascript">
if (Object.defineProperty && Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor &&
!Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(Element.prototype, "textContent").get)
(function() {
var innerText = Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(Element.prototype, "innerText");
Object.defineProperty(Element.prototype, "textContent",
{ // It won't work if you just drop in innerText.get
// and innerText.set or the whole descriptor.
get : function() {
return innerText.get.call(this)
},
set : function(x) {
return innerText.set.call(this, x)
}
}
);
})();
</script>
<![endif]-->
It's also possible to emulate innerText behavior in other browsers:
if (((typeof window.HTMLElement) !== "undefined") && ((typeof HTMLElement.prototype.__defineGetter__) !== "undefined")) {
HTMLElement.prototype.__defineGetter__("innerText", function () {
if (this.textContent) {
return this.textContent;
} else {
var r = this.ownerDocument.createRange();
r.selectNodeContents(this);
return r.toString();
}
});
HTMLElement.prototype.__defineSetter__("innerText", function (str) {
if (this.textContent) {
this.textContent = str;
} else {
this.innerHTML = str.replace(/&/g, '&').replace(/>/g, '>').replace(/</g, '<').replace(/\n/g, "<br />\n");
}
});
}
Related
this question arises from my previous post why a tiny reordering of DOM Read/Write operations causes a huge performance difference .
consider the following code:
function clearHTML(divs) {
Array.prototype.forEach.call(divs, function (div) {
contents.push(div.innerHTML);
div.innerHTML = "";
});
}
function clearText(divs) {
Array.prototype.forEach.call(divs, function (div) {
contents.push(div.innerText); //innerText in place of innerHTML
div.innerHTML = "";
});
}
http://jsfiddle.net/pindexis/ZZrYK/
My test results for n=100:
ClearHTML: ~1ms
ClearText: ~15ms
for n=1000:
ClearHTML: ~4ms
ClearText: ~1000ms
I tested the code on google chrome and IE and get similar results (Firefox does not support innerText).
Edit :
the difference between the two functions is not caused by the slowness of innerText function compared to innerHTML, that's for sure ( I tried removing div.innerHTML ="" and got boost in performance), there's strange browser reflow taking place here.
As MDN explains:
As innerText is aware of CSS styling, it will trigger a reflow, whereas textContent will not.
Using textContent instead of innerText does not cause reflow and is also fast. IE9+ also supports it as does FFX/Chrome.
The difference almost certainly comes from the extra effort it takes to get the InnerText (which I believe removes extraneous tags and just returns the text within an element). InnerHTML on the other hand simply returns data that has already been parsed and understood by the browser.
I have this Javascript here:
function getTxt(obj) {
var first = obj.innerHTML.substring(0, obj.innerHTML.indexOf('<span class=\"item2\">'));
var second = obj.innerHTML.substring(obj.innerHTML.indexOf('<span class=\"item2\">'));
var f = first.replace(/(<([^>]+)>)/ig,'');
var s = second.replace(/(<([^>]+)>)/ig,'');
alert(first + "\n" + second + "\n" + f + "\n" + s);
}
and the HTML:
<span class="item" onclick="getTxt(this)"><span class="item1">MyName</span><span class="item2">555-555-5555</span></span>
In most browsers (FireFox, Chrome, Safari, Opera) it will alert:
<span class="item1">MyName</span>
<span class="item2">555-555-5555</span>
MyName
555-555-5555
as expected. However, in IE9 it alerts:
<span class="item1">MyName</span><span class="item2">555-555-5555</span>
MyName555-555-5555
So it puts the vars "first" and "second" together into var "first", and puts "f" and "s" together into var "f".
I would like to know if there is anyway to correct this for IE9 (and probably other version of IE also) to work as it does in the other browsers.
Pattern matching innerHTML is particularly a problem in IE and is generally a bad idea. IE often does NOT return to you the same HTML that was originally in the page. It often requotes or removes quotes, changes the order of attributes, changes case, etc... IE is clearly reconstituting the HTML rather than give you back what was originally in the page. As such, you cannot reliably pattern match innerHTML in IE. There are some specific things you can probably match (the start of tags), but you can't expect attributes to be in a specific spot or to have a specific format.
If you console.log(obj.innerHTML) in IE, you will likely see what I'm talking about. It will look different.
A more robust solution is to use the DOM functions to navigate the specific elements or CSS selectors to find specific objects and then change attributes or innerHTML on a single specific element. Let the DOM navigation find the right element for you rather than parsing the HTML yourself.
If you provide a desired before and after sample of the HTML and describe what you're trying to accomplish, folks here can probably help you get the job done with DOM manipulation rather than HTML parsing.
I don't know which selector libraries you have available to you or which browsers you're targeting, but in jQuery, you could do this like this:
function getText(obj) {
return $(obj).find(".item1").text();
}
In plain javascript, in IE8 and above and all other modern browsers, you can use this:
function getText(obj) {
return obj.querySelectorAll(".item1").innerHTML;
}
If you had to support back to IE6 or IE7, I'd suggest getting the Sizzle library and use that for your queries:
function getText(obj) {
return Sizzle(".item1", obj)[0].innerHTML;
}
It happens because of "Quirky mode" in Internet Explorer. It's a huge pain in the ass, but you can disable it in IE DevTools, or by adding this metatag to your page:
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge,chrome=1" />
I'm stuck using native DOM methods (I know, right?) and I have a structure like this:
<div>
<input>
<a>
</div>
I'm using an onClick on the <a> tag, and want to retrieve the value from the input. On Chrome/OS X, something like
this.previousSibling.previousSibling.value
will work well. I double it though because the first .previousSibling returns the <div>'s Textnode, and one more before that gets the input that I want.
My question is: does .previousSibling always return the parent's text node if it exists?
Thanks!
EDIT / Solution
My hacky solution was (cross browser) to ensure I get the right element looked like this:
var el = this;
while(el.nodeType == 3 || el.tagName && el.tagName !== 'INPUT') {
el = el.previousSibling
};
console.log(el.value);
Location specific, but works cross browser, and is light enough to toss into an onClick for my needs. Thanks for the help in figuring out what was at issue here (line breaks between HTML in particular)
It returns the previous sibling node, it might be text node, it might be element node, it might be null
You can retrieve previous element nodes with .previousElementSibling which isn't supported in legacy browsers but you can use a function like:
function previousElementSibling( elem ) {
do {
elem = elem.previousSibling;
} while ( elem && elem.nodeType !== 1 );
return elem;
}
previousElementSibling(this) will result in the input element.
Does .previousSibling always return the parent's text node if it
exists?
No. It returns the immediately preceding sibling. In your case, there is a text node (a new line) immediately preceding the a element, so it returns that.
If you remove the white space it should work as expected:
<div>
<input><a></a> <!-- input is immediately preceding anchor -->
</div>
However, that's not a particularly nice solution. See #Esailija's answer for a nicer one!
According to http://www.w3schools.com/dom/prop_element_previoussibling.asp
The previousSibling property returns the previous sibling node (the
previous node in the same tree level) of the selected element
If there is no such node, this property returns null.
technically, what you're showing there is
<div><textnode><input><textnode><a><textnode></div>
...so if the browsers are following the rules, it should keep working properly. If you're asking whether or not there are browsers out there that fail to follow the rules on this, I can't help you, but I will note that IE has a habit of adding dom objects to pages (particularly as wrappers) which might prove hazardous regardless.
Edit: http://www.w3schools.com/dom/dom_nodes_navigate.asp has this to say on the topic.
Firefox, and some other browsers, will treat empty white-spaces or new
lines as text nodes, Internet Explorer will not.
The following code [jsfiddle]...
var div = document.createElement("div");
div.innerHTML = "<foo>This is a <bar /> test. <br> Another test.</foo>";
alert(div.innerHTML);
...shows this parsed structure:
<foo>This is a <bar> test. <br> Another test.</bar></foo>
i.e. the browser knows that <br> has no closing tag but since <bar> is an unknown tag to the browser, it assumes that it needs an closing tag.
I know that the /> (solidus) syntax is ignored in HTML5 and invalid in HTML4, but anyway would like to teach somehow the browser that <bar> does not need an ending tag and I can omit it. Is that possible?
Yes, I'm trying to (temporarily) misuse the HTML code for custom tags and I have my specific reasons to do that. After all, browsers should ignore unknown tags and treat them just like unstyled inline tags, so I should not break anything as long I can make sure the tag names won't ever be used in real HTML standards.
You'd have to use Object.defineProperty on HTMLElement.prototype to override the innerHTML setter and getter with your own innerHTML implementation that treats the elements you want as void. Look here for how innerHTML and the HTML parser is implemented by default.
Note though that Firefox sucks at inheritance when it comes to defining stuff on HTMLElement.prototype where it filters down to HTMLDivElement for example. Things should work fine in Opera though.
In other words, what elements are void depends on the HTML parser. The parser follows this list and innerHTML uses the same rules mostly.
So, in other words, unless you want to create your own innerHTML implementation in JS, you probably should just forget about this.
You can use the live DOM viewer though to show others how certain markup is parsed. You'll then probably notice that same end tags will implicitly close the open element.
I have some outdated innerHTML getter (not setter though) code here that uses a void element list. That may give you some ideas. But, writing a setter implementation might be more difficult.
On the other hand, if you use createElement() and appendChild() etc. instead of innerHTML, you shouldn't have to worry about this and the native innerHTML getter will output the unknown elements with end tags.
Note though, you can treat the unknown element as xml and use XMLSerializer() and DOMParser() to do things:
var x = document.createElement("test");
var serializer = new XMLSerializer();
alert(serializer.serializeToString(x));
var parser = new DOMParser();
var doc = parser.parseFromString("<test/>", "application/xml");
var div = document.createElement("div");
div.appendChild(document.importNode(doc.documentElement, true));
alert(serializer.serializeToString(div));
It's not exactly what you want, but something you can play with. (Test that in Opera instead of Firefox to see the difference with xmlns attributes. Also note that Chrome doesn't do like Opera and Firefox.)
Is there a better way then using jQuery.browser, or equivalents, for determining css 3 prefixes (-moz, -webkit, etc), as it is disencouraged? Since the css is dynamic (the user can do anything with it on runtime), css hacks and style tag hacks can't be considered.
I don't see the issue with using the navigator.userAgent to determine if you need to cater for Webkit / Gecko CSS3 prefixes. Or better yet, just stick with CSS2 until CSS3 becomes a W3C Recommendation.
The reason use of the navigator object is discouraged is because it was used over Object detection when (java)scripting for different browsers, your situation is one where it is fine to use user agent detection, because your'e specifically targeting certain quirks with different rendering engines.
Edit:
Picking up from where cy left off, you can use javascript object detection to detect whether a prefix is used, I made some quick code to do so:
window.onload = function ()
{
CSS3 = {
supported: false,
prefix: ""
};
if (typeof(document.body.style.borderRadius) != 'undefined') {
CSS3.supported = true;
CSS3.prefix = "";
} else if (typeof(document.body.style.MozBorderRadius) != 'undefined') {
CSS3.supported = true;
CSS3.prefix = "-moz-";
} else if (typeof(document.body.style.webkitBorderRadius) != 'undefined') {
CSS3.supported = true;
CSS3.prefix = "-webkit-";
}
if (CSS3.supported)
if (CSS3.prefix == "")
alert("CSS3 is supported in this browser with no prefix required.");
else
alert("CSS3 is supported in this browser with the prefix: '"+CSS3.prefix+"'.");
else
alert("CSS3 is NOT supported in this browser.");
};
Remember to watch out for strange quirks such as -moz-opacity which is only supported in older versions of Firefox but has now been deprecated in favour of opacity, while it still uses the -moz- prefix for other new CSS3 styles.
Array.prototype.slice.call(
document.defaultView.getComputedStyle(document.body, "")
)
.join("")
.match(/(?:-(moz|webkit|ms|khtml)-)/);
Will return an array with two elements. One with dashes and one without dashes, both lowercase, for your convenience.
Array.prototype.slice.call(
document.defaultView.getComputedStyle(document.body, "")
);
Without the browser check will return an array of nearly all the css properties the browser understands. Since it's computed style it won't display shorthand versions, but otherwise I think it gets all of them. It's a quick hop skip and a jump to auto detect whatever you need as only vendor prefixed stuff starts with a dash.
IE9, Chrome, Safari, FF. Opera won't let you slice CSSStyleDeclaration for you can still use the same getComputedStyle code and loop through the properties or test for a specific one. Opera also wanted to be the odd man out and not report the vendor prefix dasherized. Thanks Opera.
Object.keys(CSSStyleDeclaration.prototype)
Works in IE9 and FF and reports the TitleCased (JavaScript) version of the vendor property names. Doesn't work in WebKit as the prototype only reports the methods.
Here's an interesting and very dangerous function I just wrote along these lines:
(function(vp,np){
Object.keys(this).filter(function(p){return vp=vp||p.match(/^(Moz|ms)/)}).forEach(function(op){
this.__defineGetter__(np=op.replace(vp[0], ""), function() { return this[op] });
this.__defineSetter__(np, function(val) { this[op] = val.toString() });
}, this);
}).call(CSSStyleDeclaration.prototype);
I didn't test anything Konquerer.
It's adding in another library, but would Modernizr work for you? It adds CSS classes to the <html> tag that can tell you what the browser supports.
It does muddy up the code a bit, but can certainly be helpful in appropriate situations.
Speculatively: Yes. You can try adding a vendor prefix css rule (that's what they're called), and then test to see if that rule exists. Those vendor-specific rules won't be added to the DOM in browsers in which they're not supported in some cases.
For example, if you try adding a -moz rule in webkit, it won't add to the DOM, and thus jQuery won't be able to detect it.
so,
$('#blah').css('-moz-border-radius','1px');
$('#blah').css('-moz-border-radius') //null in Chrome
Conversely,
$('#blah').css('-webkit-border-radius','1px');
$('#blah').css('-webkit-border-radius'); //returns "" in Chrome
This method works in WebKit browsers; I'm testing to see if it works in others. Pending.
Edit: Sadly, this isn't working in Firefox or Opera, which just returns "" no matter compatibility. Thinking of ways to do this cross-browser...
Final Edit: Andrew Dunn's answer does this in a way that works (at least in FF and Webkit, which is better than my method).
I use ternary operator to have it only in 1 line. If it's not webkit nor gecko, I'll just use the standard property. If it has no support, who really cares then?
var prefix = ('webkitAnimation' in document.body.style) ? '-webkit-' : ('MozAnimation' in document.body.style? '-moz-' : '');
Basically I found Animation is one of the properties never changed. As soon as the browser starts supporting the Draft / Candidate Recommendation of a CSS3 property, it drops the prefix on JS side. So you will need to be careful and take in mind that, before copy-pasting.