It's said by this article that one of the important reasons for HTML properties to be reflected back to the DOM is because CSS selectors rely on attributes, but why's that? This could be done without the reflection based on the spec.
For people who don't know what I'm talking about, read below:
In browsers, CSS selectors rely on attributes to work.
#myButton[someAttribute] {
opacity: 0.5;
font-weight: bold
}
So in our JavaScript if we change the property of an element, eventually we have to reflect it to the HTML DOM as well like this:
// we have changed some property
myButton.someAttribute= true;
// but this is not adequate, we need to reflect as well
myButton.setAttribute('someAttribute', '');
so we get this:
<button id="myButton" someAttribute></button>
not this non-reflected button:
<button id="myButton"></button>
Not all DOM properties map to attributes. The ones that do reflect to and from attributes, do so to maintain parity with the document language — in this case, HTML, which only has a concept of attributes, which as you've correctly pointed out is relied on by Selectors.
If attribute selectors mapped directly to DOM properties without the DOM discriminating between attribute properties and other kinds of properties, then attribute selectors such as the following would match, even though none of these exist as attributes in HTML:
[classList]
[className]
[dataset]
[offsetLeft]
[offsetTop]
[offsetWidth]
[offsetHeight]
... as well as [someAttribute] matching elements with your non-existent someAttribute as a property even when you don't reflect it with setAttribute().
In fact, this is exactly why label[htmlFor] incorrectly matches label[for] elements in Internet Explorer 7, even though the for attribute in HTML is simply called for, not htmlFor — the DOM uses htmlFor to make up for the fact that for is a reserved word in many languages including JavaScript, the main DOM scripting language, preventing it from being used as a property ident.
DOM attributes and properties are not equivalent, but they're related.
Attributes are intended to be used to initialize DOM properties. When the HTML is parsed, all the attributes are used to initialize the corresponding DOM properties. If you later modify an attribute with setAttribute or removeAttribute, the corresponding property is also updated (similar to reloading the HTML with the new attribute).
But it doesn't go the other way. Updating a property doesn't change the corresponding attribute. This is why you can assign to the .value of an input, and see this reflected in the browser display, but when you look at the element in Developer Tools you still see the original value="whatever" attribute. In some cases this has special benefits -- when you click on the Reset button of a form, it resets all the value properties from their value attributes.
IMHO; Some attributes have a 1:1 mapping with their respective properties in the DOM. The reflection is automatically made for common attributes like id. You can also define your own attributes (your HTML will be considered invalid, but you can use the doctype to validate them). My guess is that due to this uncertainty created by rogue attributes. They preferred to map only the attribute:property which has predictable behaviour and usage. You can still use your custom attributes in your css but you're in manual mode. You got to keep your s**t together and reflect them yourself. This far west(freedom) mentality is one the things that made web tech so popular and easy to use. You can do things as you see fit. I do not recommend it for maintainability reasons but you could.
Your example uses a button, but the article is using the disabled property but with something other than a button. On a button, the browser will automatically reflect changes to the disabled property onto the attribute, and vice versa, but this doesn't happen with all elements. Change your example to use a div and you'll see that you'd need to manually coordinate the two if desired.
Or for custom attributes, use data- attributes instead. If you delete the property from my_element.dataset, I'm pretty sure the attribute will be deleted too.
This is to keep the HTML and DOM synchronized, because at some point CSS selectors will be checking the DOM element and relying on the attributes to be accurate.
If the DOM isn't accurate, then the CSS won't be accurate either. What if HTML didn't bother to reflect attributes back to the DOM?
Let's say the text of an input field is initially black, and you want the text to be red when it is disabled. Now let's say the user did something and a function you wrote disabled the input field through javascript.
If HTML didn't reflect that 'disabled' attribute back to the DOM, CSS would NEVER KNOW that the element was disabled.
So the text color would never be changed to red. Remember, CSS checks and relies on DOM attributes. If HTML doesn't change the DOM attributes, for all CSS cares about, nothing has changed so everything will remain the same.
For a less technical analogy, let's say CSS is Batman, HTML is Gotham Police Department, an Attribute is the bat-signal, and the DOM is the sky.
Batman(css) constantly checks the sky(dom) to see if his bat-signal light(attribute) is being shown by the Gotham Police Department(html). If there was some event(an attribute changed) which happened in Gotham where the Gotham Police Department(html) needed Batman(css) to help, but they just didn't bother to send him an update through the sky(dom) with the bat-signal(attribute update), Batman would never know there was a job that needs to be done.
I mean he's an awesome super hero so he would eventually find out but sadly, CSS is no Batman.
The article speaks about custom elements, and takes the example of a <div> element with it's natural behaviour for some properties like hidden or disabled.
So, first of all, don't take the sentence you mention as a directive from your god, because it's not.
Simply, if you have an application with some css using the disasbled property for specific styling, be aware that, if you want to :
create some custom elements
manipulate their attributes through Javascript, including disasbled
see the css applied for disasbled property of custom elements you are manipulating
Then, yes, you'll need to reflect back to DOM
Well, this is the first question I'm answering but I'll try either way.
To be honest, it's kinda hard to tell what you're asking but if you're looking to reflect HTMLElement property changes back on the DOM (via attributes). Then here's the code (using HTMLElement's):
// Defines a new property on an Object.
Object.defineProperty(HTMLElement.prototype, "someAttribute", {
// Configurable
configurable: true,
// Enumerable
enumerable: true,
/* Getter
(Allows you get the value like this =>
element.someAttribute // returns the value of "someAttribute"
)
*/
get: function() {
return this.getAttribute("someAttribute")
},
/* Setter
(Allows you to modify/ update the value like this =>
element.someAttribute = "lorem ipsum"
)
*/
set: function(data) {
this.setAttribute("someAttribute", data)
}
})
Hope this answered your question.
So jQuery 1.6 has the new function prop().
$(selector).click(function(){
//instead of:
this.getAttribute('style');
//do i use:
$(this).prop('style');
//or:
$(this).attr('style');
})
or in this case do they do the same thing?
And if I do have to switch to using prop(), all the old attr() calls will break if i switch to 1.6?
UPDATE
selector = '#id'
$(selector).click(function() {
//instead of:
var getAtt = this.getAttribute('style');
//do i use:
var thisProp = $(this).prop('style');
//or:
var thisAttr = $(this).attr('style');
console.log(getAtt, thisProp, thisAttr);
});
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.6.0/jquery.min.js"></script>
<div id='id' style="color: red;background: orange;">test</div>
(see also this fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/maniator/JpUF2/)
The console logs the getAttribute as a string, and the attr as a string, but the prop as a CSSStyleDeclaration, Why? And how does that affect my coding in the future?
Update 1 November 2012
My original answer applies specifically to jQuery 1.6. My advice remains the same but jQuery 1.6.1 changed things slightly: in the face of the predicted pile of broken websites, the jQuery team reverted attr() to something close to (but not exactly the same as) its old behaviour for Boolean attributes. John Resig also blogged about it. I can see the difficulty they were in but still disagree with his recommendation to prefer attr().
Original answer
If you've only ever used jQuery and not the DOM directly, this could be a confusing change, although it is definitely an improvement conceptually. Not so good for the bazillions of sites using jQuery that will break as a result of this change though.
I'll summarize the main issues:
You usually want prop() rather than attr().
In the majority of cases, prop() does what attr() used to do. Replacing calls to attr() with prop() in your code will generally work.
Properties are generally simpler to deal with than attributes. An attribute value may only be a string whereas a property can be of any type. For example, the checked property is a Boolean, the style property is an object with individual properties for each style, the size property is a number.
Where both a property and an attribute with the same name exists, usually updating one will update the other, but this is not the case for certain attributes of inputs, such as value and checked: for these attributes, the property always represents the current state while the attribute (except in old versions of IE) corresponds to the default value/checkedness of the input (reflected in the defaultValue / defaultChecked property).
This change removes some of the layer of magic jQuery stuck in front of attributes and properties, meaning jQuery developers will have to learn a bit about the difference between properties and attributes. This is a good thing.
If you're a jQuery developer and are confused by this whole business about properties and attributes, you need to take a step back and learn a little about it, since jQuery is no longer trying so hard to shield you from this stuff. For the authoritative but somewhat dry word on the subject, there's the specs: DOM4, HTML DOM, DOM Level 2, DOM Level 3. Mozilla's DOM documentation is valid for most modern browsers and is easier to read than the specs, so you may find their DOM reference helpful. There's a section on element properties.
As an example of how properties are simpler to deal with than attributes, consider a checkbox that is initially checked. Here are two possible pieces of valid HTML to do this:
<input id="cb" type="checkbox" checked>
<input id="cb" type="checkbox" checked="checked">
So, how do you find out if the checkbox is checked with jQuery? Look on Stack Overflow and you'll commonly find the following suggestions:
if ( $("#cb").attr("checked") === true ) {...}
if ( $("#cb").attr("checked") == "checked" ) {...}
if ( $("#cb").is(":checked") ) {...}
This is actually the simplest thing in the world to do with the checked Boolean property, which has existed and worked flawlessly in every major scriptable browser since 1995:
if (document.getElementById("cb").checked) {...}
The property also makes checking or unchecking the checkbox trivial:
document.getElementById("cb").checked = false
In jQuery 1.6, this unambiguously becomes
$("#cb").prop("checked", false)
The idea of using the checked attribute for scripting a checkbox is unhelpful and unnecessary. The property is what you need.
It's not obvious what the correct way to check or uncheck the checkbox is using the checked attribute
The attribute value reflects the default rather than the current visible state (except in some older versions of IE, thus making things still harder). The attribute tells you nothing about the whether the checkbox on the page is checked. See http://jsfiddle.net/VktA6/49/.
I think Tim said it quite well, but let's step back:
A DOM element is an object, a thing in memory. Like most objects in OOP, it has properties. It also, separately, has a map of the attributes defined on the element (usually coming from the markup that the browser read to create the element). Some of the element's properties get their initial values from attributes with the same or similar names (value gets its initial value from the "value" attribute; href gets its initial value from the "href" attribute, but it's not exactly the same value; className from the "class" attribute). Other properties get their initial values in other ways: For instance, the parentNode property gets its value based on what its parent element is; an element always has a style property, whether it has a "style" attribute or not.
Let's consider this anchor in a page at http://example.com/testing.html:
<a href='foo.html' class='test one' name='fooAnchor' id='fooAnchor'>Hi</a>
Some gratuitous ASCII art (and leaving out a lot of stuff):
+−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−+
| HTMLAnchorElement |
+−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−+
| href: "http://example.com/foo.html" |
| name: "fooAnchor" |
| id: "fooAnchor" |
| className: "test one" |
| attributes: |
| href: "foo.html" |
| name: "fooAnchor" |
| id: "fooAnchor" |
| class: "test one" |
+−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−+
Note that the properties and attributes are distinct.
Now, although they are distinct, because all of this evolved rather than being designed from the ground up, a number of properties write back to the attribute they derived from if you set them. But not all do, and as you can see from href above, the mapping is not always a straight "pass the value on", sometimes there's interpretation involved.
When I talk about properties being properties of an object, I'm not speaking in the abstract. Here's some non-jQuery code:
var link = document.getElementById('fooAnchor');
alert(link.href); // alerts "http://example.com/foo.html"
alert(link.getAttribute("href")); // alerts "foo.html"
(Those values are as per most browsers; there's some variation.)
The link object is a real thing, and you can see there's a real distinction between accessing a property on it, and accessing an attribute.
As Tim said, the vast majority of the time, we want to be working with properties. Partially that's because their values (even their names) tend to be more consistent across browsers. We mostly only want to work with attributes when there is no property related to it (custom attributes), or when we know that for that particular attribute, the attribute and the property are not 1:1 (as with href and "href" above).
The standard properties are laid out in the various DOM specs:
DOM2 HTML (largely obsolete, see the HTML spec instead)
DOM2 Core (obsolete)
DOM3 Core (obsolete)
DOM4
These specs have excellent indexes and I recommend keeping links to them handy; I use them all the time.
Custom attributes would include, for instance, any data-xyz attributes you might put on elements to provide meta-data to your code (now that that's valid as of HTML5, as long as you stick to the data- prefix). (Recent versions of jQuery give you access to data-xyz elements via the data function, but that function is not just an accessor for data-xyz attributes [it does both more and less than that]; unless you actually need its features, I'd use the attr function to interact with data-xyz attribute.)
The attr function used to have some convoluted logic around getting what they thought you wanted, rather than literally getting the attribute. It conflated the concepts. Moving to prop and attr was meant to de-conflate them. Briefly in v1.6.0 jQuery went too far in that regard, but functionality was quickly added back to attr to handle the common situations where people use attr when technically they should use prop.
This change has been a long time coming for jQuery. For years, they've been content with a function named attr() that mostly retrieved DOM properties, not the result you'd expect from the name. The segregation of attr() and prop() should help alleviate some of the confusion between HTML attributes and DOM properties. $.fn.prop() grabs the specified DOM property, while $.fn.attr() grabs the specified HTML attribute.
To fully understand how they work, here's an extended explanation on the difference between HTML attributes and DOM properties.:
HTML Attributes
Syntax:
<body onload="foo()">
Purpose:
Allows markup to have data associated with it for events, rendering, and other purposes.
Visualization:
The class attribute is shown here on the body. It's accessible through the following code:
var attr;
attr = document.body.getAttribute("class");
//IE 8 Quirks and below
attr = document.body.getAttribute("className");
Attributes are returned in string form and can be inconsistent from browser to browser. However, they can be vital in some situations. As exemplified above, IE 8 Quirks Mode (and below) expects the name of a DOM property in get/set/removeAttribute instead of the attribute name. This is one of many reasons why it's important to know the difference.
DOM Properties
Syntax:
document.body.onload = foo;
Purpose:
Gives access to properties that belong to element nodes. These properties are similar to attributes, but are only accessible through JavaScript. This is an important difference that helps clarify the role of DOM properties. Please note that attributes are completely different from properties, as this event handler assignment is useless and won't receive the event (body doesn't have an onload event, only an onload attribute).
Visualization:
Here, you'll notice a list of properties under the "DOM" tab in Firebug. These are DOM properties. You'll immediately notice quite a few of them, as you'll have used them before without knowing it. Their values are what you'll be receiving through JavaScript.
Documentation
JavaScript: The Definitive Guide by
David Flanagan
HTML Attributes,
Mozilla Dev Center
DOM Element Properties, Mozilla Dev Center
Example
HTML: <textarea id="test" value="foo"></textarea>
JavaScript: alert($('#test').attr('value'));
In earlier versions of jQuery, this returns an empty string. In 1.6, it returns the proper value, foo.
Without having glanced at the new code for either function, I can say with confidence that the confusion has more to do with the difference between HTML attributes and DOM properties, than with the code itself. Hopefully, this cleared some things up for you.
-Matt
A property is in the DOM; an attribute is in the HTML that is parsed into the DOM.
Further detail
If you change an attribute, the change will be reflected in the DOM (sometimes with a different name).
Example: Changing the class attribute of a tag will change the className property of that tag in the DOM (That's because class is already used).
If you have no attribute on a tag, you still have the corresponding DOM property with an empty or a default value.
Example: While your tag has no class attribute, the DOM property className does exist with a empty string value.
edit
If you change the one, the other will be changed by a controller, and vice versa.
This controller is not in jQuery, but in the browser's native code.
It's just the distinction between HTML attributes and DOM objects that causes a confusion. For those that are comfortable acting on the DOM elements native properties such a this.src this.value this.checked etc, .prop is a very warm welcome to the family. For others, it's just an added layer of confusion. Let's clear that up.
The easiest way to see the difference between .attr and .prop is the following example:
<input blah="hello">
$('input').attr('blah'): returns 'hello' as expected. No suprises here.
$('input').prop('blah'): returns undefined -- because it's trying to do [HTMLInputElement].blah -- and no such property on that DOM object exists. It only exists in the scope as an attribute of that element i.e. [HTMLInputElement].getAttribute('blah')
Now we change a few things like so:
$('input').attr('blah', 'apple');
$('input').prop('blah', 'pear');
$('input').attr('blah'): returns 'apple' eh? Why not "pear" as this was set last on that element. Because the property was changed on the input attribute, not the DOM input element itself -- they basically almost work independently of each other.
$('input').prop('blah'): returns 'pear'
The thing you really need to be careful with is just do not mix the usage of these for the same property throughout your application for the above reason.
See a fiddle demonstrating the difference: http://jsfiddle.net/garreh/uLQXc/
.attr vs .prop:
Round 1: style
<input style="font:arial;"/>
.attr('style') -- returns inline styles for the matched element i.e. "font:arial;"
.prop('style') -- returns an style declaration object i.e. CSSStyleDeclaration
Round 2: value
<input value="hello" type="text"/>
$('input').prop('value', 'i changed the value');
.attr('value') -- returns 'hello' *
.prop('value') -- returns 'i changed the value'
* Note: jQuery for this reason has a .val() method, which internally is equivalent to .prop('value')
TL;DR
Use prop() over attr() in the majority of cases.
A property is the current state of the input element. An attribute is the default value.
A property can contain things of different types. An attribute can only contain strings
Dirty checkedness
This concept provides an example where the difference is observable: http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/forms.html#concept-input-checked-dirty
Try it out:
click the button. Both checkboxes got checked.
uncheck both checkboxes.
click the button again. Only the prop checkbox got checked. BANG!
$('button').on('click', function() {
$('#attr').attr('checked', 'checked')
$('#prop').prop('checked', true)
})
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/2.1.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<label>attr <input id="attr" type="checkbox"></label>
<label>prop <input id="prop" type="checkbox"></label>
<button type="button">Set checked attr and prop.</button>
For some attributes like disabled on button, adding or removing the content attribute disabled="disabled" always toggles the property (called IDL attribute in HTML5) because http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/forms.html#attr-fe-disabled says:
The disabled IDL attribute must reflect the disabled content attribute.
so you might get away with it, although it is ugly since it modifies HTML without need.
For other attributes like checked="checked" on input type="checkbox", things break, because once you click on it, it becomes dirty, and then adding or removing the checked="checked" content attribute does not toggle checkedness anymore.
This is why you should use mostly .prop, as it affects the effective property directly, instead of relying on complex side-effects of modifying the HTML.
All is in the doc:
The difference between attributes and properties can be important in specific situations. Before jQuery 1.6, the .attr() method sometimes took property values into account when retrieving some attributes, which could cause inconsistent behavior. As of jQuery 1.6, the .prop() method provides a way to explicitly retrieve property values, while .attr() retrieves attributes.
So use prop!
attributes are in your HTML text document/file (== imagine this is the result of your html markup parsed), whereas
properties are in HTML DOM tree (== basically an actual property of some object in JS sense).
Importantly, many of them are synced (if you update class property, class attribute in html will also be updated; and otherwise). But some attributes may be synced to unexpected properties - eg, attribute checked corresponds to property defaultChecked, so that
manually checking a checkbox will change .prop('checked') value, but will not change .attr('checked') and .prop('defaultChecked') values
setting $('#input').prop('defaultChecked', true) will also change .attr('checked'), but this will not be visible on an element.
Rule of thumb is: .prop() method should be used for boolean attributes/properties and for properties which do not exist in html
(such as window.location). All other attributes (ones you can see in
the html) can and should continue to be manipulated with the .attr()
method. (http://blog.jquery.com/2011/05/10/jquery-1-6-1-rc-1-released/)
And here is a table that shows where .prop() is preferred (even though .attr() can still be used).
Why would you sometimes want to use .prop() instead of .attr() where latter is officially adviced?
.prop() can return any type - string, integer, boolean; while .attr() always returns a string.
.prop() is said to be about 2.5 times faster than .attr().
.attr():
Get the value of an attribute for the first element in the set of matched elements.
Gives you the value of element as it was defined in the html on page load
.prop():
Get the value of a property for the first element in the set of matched elements.
Gives the updated values of elements which is modified via javascript/jquery
Usually you'll want to use properties.
Use attributes only for:
Getting a custom HTML attribute (since it's not synced with a DOM property).
Getting a HTML attribute that doesn't sync with a DOM property, e.g. get the "original value" of a standard HTML attribute, like <input value="abc">.
attributes -> HTML
properties -> DOM
Before jQuery 1.6 , the attr() method sometimes took property values into account when retrieving attributes, this caused rather inconsistent behavior.
The introduction of the prop() method provides a way to explicitly retrieve property values, while .attr() retrieves attributes.
The Docs:
jQuery.attr()
Get the value of an attribute for the first element in the set of matched elements.
jQuery.prop()
Get the value of a property for the first element in the set of matched elements.
One thing .attr() can do that .prop() can't: affect CSS selectors
Here's an issue I didn't see in the other answers.
CSS selector [name=value]
will respond to .attr('name', 'value')
but not always to .prop('name', 'value')
.prop() affects only a few attribute-selectors
input[name] (thanks #TimDown)
.attr() affects all attribute-selectors
input[value]
input[naame]
span[name]
input[data-custom-attribute] (neither will .data('custom-attribute') affect this selector)
Gently reminder about using prop(), example:
if ($("#checkbox1").prop('checked')) {
isDelete = 1;
} else {
isDelete = 0;
}
The function above is used to check if checkbox1 is checked or not, if checked: return 1; if not: return 0. Function prop() used here as a GET function.
if ($("#checkbox1").prop('checked', true)) {
isDelete = 1;
} else {
isDelete = 0;
}
The function above is used to set checkbox1 to be checked and ALWAYS return 1. Now function prop() used as a SET function.
Don't mess up.
P/S: When I'm checking Image src property. If the src is empty, prop return the current URL of the page (wrong), and attr return empty string (right).
1) A property is in the DOM; an attribute is in the HTML that is
parsed into the DOM.
2) $( elem ).attr( "checked" ) (1.6.1+) "checked" (String) Will
change with checkbox state
3) $( elem ).attr( "checked" ) (pre-1.6) true (Boolean) Changed
with checkbox state
Mostly we want to use for DOM object rather then custom attribute
like data-img, data-xyz.
Also some of difference when accessing checkbox value and href
with attr() and prop() as thing change with DOM output with
prop() as full link from origin and Boolean value for checkbox
(pre-1.6)
We can only access DOM elements with prop other then it gives undefined
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.6.0/jquery.min.js"></script>
<!doctype html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8">
<title>prop demo</title>
<style>
p {
margin: 20px 0 0;
}
b {
color: blue;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<input id="check1" type="checkbox" checked="checked">
<label for="check1">Check me</label>
<p></p>
<script>
$("input").change(function() {
var $input = $(this);
$("p").html(
".attr( \"checked\" ): <b>" + $input.attr("checked") + "</b><br>" +
".prop( \"checked\" ): <b>" + $input.prop("checked") + "</b><br>" +
".is( \":checked\" ): <b>" + $input.is(":checked")) + "</b>";
}).change();
</script>
</body>
</html>
There are few more considerations in prop() vs attr():
selectedIndex, tagName, nodeName, nodeType, ownerDocument, defaultChecked, and defaultSelected..etc should be retrieved and set with the .prop() method. These do not have corresponding attributes and are only properties.
For input type checkbox
.attr('checked') //returns checked
.prop('checked') //returns true
.is(':checked') //returns true
prop method returns Boolean value for checked, selected, disabled,
readOnly..etc while attr returns defined string. So, you can directly
use .prop(‘checked’) in if condition.
.attr() calls .prop() internally so .attr() method will be slightly
slower than accessing them directly through .prop().
Gary Hole answer is very relevant to solve the problem if the code is written in such way
obj.prop("style","border:1px red solid;")
Since the prop function return CSSStyleDeclaration object, above code will not working properly in some browser(tested with IE8 with Chrome Frame Plugin in my case).
Thus changing it into following code
obj.prop("style").cssText = "border:1px red solid;"
solved the problem.
In a browser that is displaying an XHTML document with namespaced elements, how can I use JavaScript to access the .style properties of an element outside the HTML namespace?
document.getElementsByTagNameNS(namespace, tagName) returns a collection of objects but the objects don’t have a CSSStyleDeclaration style property (at least not in Chrome or Firefox).
You could say that is by design, that CSS is specific to HTML. But namespaced CSS styles the content just fine. So the style information is in there somewhere. How do I read and write it?
I want to know, for example, which elements are being rendered as blocks and which inline.
(Edit to add example:)
To see this, go to www.johnmccaskey.com/style.xhtml. The blue part is in HTML namespace, the red part in http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0 namespace. CSS styled them both just fine. In, say, Chrome’s console, enter document.getElementsByTagName("box"). You’ll see the two <box> objects. The HTML one has a .style property, the TEI one does not.
The .style property is a reflection of the content attribute on the HTML element, e.g. <div style="color:green">, not a reflection of its computed styles obtained from the cascade.
To get the computed values, use window.getComputedStyle().
To see it in action, add this script to your XHTML, just before the </body> tag
<script>
var boxes = document.body.children;
console.log(window.getComputedStyle(boxes[0], null).getPropertyValue("color"));
console.log(window.getComputedStyle(boxes[1], null).getPropertyValue("color"));
</script>
And inspect the console output.
To tell whether an element is inline or block or some other display value, use window.getComputedStyle(element, null).getPropertyValue("display")
With this fiddle http://jsfiddle.net/mungbeans/f2ne6/2/
why is the opacity undefined when accessed in js when its defined in the css?
I presume the answer is because the style is also undefined, why is that, does the style need adding somewhere explicitly before the opacity can be defined?
EDIT
the lack of [] is a typo created as I copied from source to fiddle. The style/opacity problem still exits in the original code which is correct in that aspect.
title.style.opacity
should be:
title[0].style.opacity
since getElementsByTagName returns a nodeList.
EDIT:
This still doesn't get the value. You'll need to do the following:
window.getComputedStyle(title[0]).opacity
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/DOM/window.getComputedStyle?redirectlocale=en-US&redirectslug=DOM%3Awindow.getComputedStyle
DEMO: http://jsfiddle.net/f2ne6/12/
For two reasons:
getElementsByTagName() returns a list of elements, not a single element as getElementById(). Thus, you need to subscript the resulting NodeList to get the required DOM element;
Most importantly, when you access the styles through the style property of the element, you'll only get the inline styles, not the ones that you assign through a CSS class.
To get the computed styles, you could use window.getComputedStyle(), which will give you the final used values of all the CSS properties of the element:
alert(window.getComputedStyle(title).opacity);
DEMO.
Unfortunately, getComputedStyle is not available in IE < 9, but you can easily find a polyfill, such as this one.
It's because the style property of an HTML element (in the DOM) does not contain the computed style, it contains the immediately defined style of the element. Consider the following HTML:
<div id="one" style="width: 50px;"></div>
If you call document.getElementById("one").style.width, you'll get "50px" back. However, if you remove the style attribute and instead use CSS to style the div to have a width of 50 pixels, it will return "". You can see this in action here:
http://jsfiddle.net/aAbJY/
You're probably looking for the computed style, which can be obtained in most browsers using getComputedStyle(). It doesn't work in IE until IE9, though there's probably a way to do it in IE<9. The computed style will return the opacity no matter where it's defined. See an updated example with getComputedStyle() here:
http://jsfiddle.net/aAbJY/1/
Chase is correct, but there's another problem in your code. The style property only contains styles that were set with the style attribute of the element, so Chase's solution will only go halfway to fixing your problem. What you want to do is use the getComputedStyle() function to get the runtime style of your element:
function test(id) {
var listElement = document.getElementById(id);
var titles = listElement.getElementsByTagName("div");
var style = getComputedStyle(titles[0]);
alert( "Opacity: " + style.opacity );
}
See my updated jsfiddle here: http://jsfiddle.net/7vQ4A/1/