I'm trying to make pull XML or Csv data into a HTML file then I want to use math to add up the values and show the result on the page ( I'm basically trying to display invoices on a web browser)
My skill set is HTML/CSS and I understand a little JavaScript
I've managed to pull XML data into HTML using http request and style that information using xslt
Really what I'm asking is what is the best solution to my needs is it using the above method then using xquiry to add up values or would I need to learn a bit of Ajax, Json and calculate the values with JavaScript?
You really should learn AJAX in order to fetch and manipulate data instead of fetching presentation parts. That's the way everyone follows as it allows more responsive interactions with the user and a cleaner architecture in case of complex interactions.
But that doesn't mean you must abandon XML : originally AJAX was built on XML (the X in AJAX) and not JSON.
Personally I prefer JSON, and I think it will be easier to manage in the long term, but if the server side is hard to change, you can fetch the XML (look for example at jquery's ajax function), build javascript objects using it, and then change your screen using those data. If later you decide to use JSON instead of XML, you'll just have to change the "parsing" part of the client code.
"I'm trying to make pull XML or Csv data into a HTML file then I want to use math to add up the values and show the result on the page"
You can do this with either XSLT or javascript. However, with XSLT things can become pretty complicated, depending on what version you're using. XSLT 1.0 has pretty limited set of functions for aggregating results. For all XSLT, you can't reassign variables you'll have to solve many of these things with recursion. In my opinion, not really a comfortable method.
Regardless of the choice between XSLT and Javascript, I would also question the architecture that would put this kind of logic in the presentation layer in the browser. I think it would be better if the server side would perform all the calculations that are required, and limit the browser's tasks to styling the output.
Related
I have a large-ish amount of server-side data that I need to store in a mySQL table. [I'm a novice, working through the learning curve of javascript & php.]
I'm thinking it's best to stringify the javascript array into a JSON object and send that to a PHP page to save to the database. Once the data's in a PHP array, I know how* to get it into the database; I'm just not sure what's the best way to get it there.
I can't POST (like this example) since the maximum length of a POST string is 2048 characters, and I have maybe 10-20kb of data.
I'd rather not use AJAX or Node.js (like this example) for the sake of simplicity, and since this is a one-off (but both on my list to learn in the future!)
Or, would it be best to create a temp text file to the server with javascript, and then call a PHP page to load & process the data? (Although I can't find examples of how to do that without using POST.)
I understand the difference between server-side & client-side (thanks to this great explanation) but the size limit of POST seems to be my issue?
*Also I'm a little unsure as to when/how it's necessary to encode data (like with this deprecated mysql-real-escape-string example) for storage with {json/posting/DB tables/text}. In this case my data could contain 'single' & "double" quotes (but no foreign characters 国外 वर्ण), which [in my short experience] seem like the only times it will be an issue?
Thanks!
The problem is that Javascript is client side language while PHP is server side language. This means that PHP cannot interact with the user without some HTML, CSS or JavaScript and visa-versa, JavaScript can't interact with server side files without some PHP. Why is this? Since JavaScript is client side the user can edit it as they can see the code while with a PHP script it is all on the server and they are not able to see the code, only what it outputs/prints. So in short you cannot do what you are asking without POST or GET and it is not possible to do this without a server side script such as a PHP script (Python is also very useful if you are thinking of learning more about web backends).
There are numerous example of how to do this that you can find with a simple google search, here is a great example send data to MySQL with AJAX + jQuery + PHP
Hope I could clarify your question.
I want to create a AJAX search to find and list topics in a forum (just topic link and subject).
The question is: Which one of the methods is better and faster?
GET threads list as a JSON string and convert it to an object, then loop over items and create a <li/> or <tr>, write data (link, subject) and append it to threads list. (jQuery Powered)
GET threads list which it wrapped in HTML tags and print it (or use innerHTML and $(e).html())
Thanks...
I prefer the second method.
I figure server-side you have to either convert your data to JSON or html format so why not go directly to the one the browser understands and avoid having to reprocess it client-side. Also you can easily adapt the second method to degrade gracefully for users who have disabled JavaScript (such that they still see the results via standard non-JS links.)
I'm not sure which way is better (I assume the second method is better as it would seem to touch the data less) but a definitive way to found out is try both ways and measure which one does better.
'Faster' is probably the second method.
'Better' is probably subjective.
For example, I've been in situations (as a front end dev) where I couldn't alter the html the server was returning and i wished they would have just delivered a json object so i could design the page how i wanted.
Also, (perhaps not specific to your use case), serving up all the html on initial page load could increase the page size and load time.
Server generated HTML is certainly faster if the javascript takes long time to process the JSON and populate the html.
However, for maintainability, JS is better. You can change HTML generation just by changing JS, not having to update server side code, making a delta release etc etc.
Best is to measure how slow it really is. Sometimes we think it is slow, but then you try it out in real world and you don't really see a big difference. You might have the major delay in transmitting the JSON object. That delay will still be there and infact increase if you send an html representation from the server.
So, if you bottleneck really is parsing JSON and generating html, not the transmission from server, then sending html from server makes sense.
However, you can do a lot of optimization in producing the html and parsing JSON. There are so many tricks to make that faster. Best if you show me the code and I can help you make a fast JS based implementation or can tell you to do it on the server.
I'm new to web applications and am trying to understand the best way to work with data in HTML. I'm using Appengine (Python) and have managed to load a bunch of data to the view. In the simplest form, it's a set of movie names and each name has associated details with it (e.g. year, rating etc). Now how do I pass data between the movie link and then a div where all the details will be displayed? I'll be using jQuery for some controls in my application so I'm wondering if there's a way to do data binding to controls with that?
Additionally, can anyone tell me what're the standards around this i.e. if I load all this data to the UI in one call (assuming it's not a lot of movie titles), wouldn't it make it easy for people to screen scrape this information? Or is there some obfuscation that's typically used here?
Sorry if I'm not very clear but I really am an absolute beginner with web development!
Update1:
I found the jQuery data() api. It seems like this'll work. Comments?
Update2:
Some testing later and it turns out that data() actually attaches the data to the elements rather than showing it in a div itself.
There's a few ways to do it but the basic idea is to put the data in the HTML in a way that is not visibly rendered, then use Javascript to parse the HTML and pull the data out when you need it.
The easiest way on modern browsers is to use data- attributes. These are any attribute that start with data-, and you can name the rest yourself. For example:
Czar Wars
In this case, the user will only see a link called "Tsar Wars" but your javascript can easily access the data- attributes to get the data it needs. The other benefit of this approach is that jQuery will automatically make data- attributes accessible by the data() api.
Another way to do it is to have a hidden HTML list element with all your data elements in the list, but you'll have to parse this all yourself.
There's no standard obfuscation. You'll need to obfuscate yourself on the server side, and unobfuscate in your JS. It's not too difficult to figure out any obfuscation algorighm in js, so this is not worth your while.
If the data really is private, then you would have to architect it as to do all the processing on the server. For example, only show tokens (like 1234), and use AJAX calls to pass the token to the server so the server can do the data processing and spit back publicly safe results to the script.
I'm coding a website that involves storing very simple data, just a very long list of names with no additional data, on the server. As this data is so simple, I don't really want to use MySQL (it would be a bit too clunky) so I'm asking what's the best way to store very simple data on the server.
I definitely would favour speed over anything else, and easy access to the data via javascript and AJAX would be very good too as the rest of the site is coded in javascript/jQuery. I don't really care if the data can be viewed freely (as it will be available anyway), as long as it can't be changed by unauthorised users.
There are a lot of things to think about with this.
Is the information the same for all users with just a single set that applies to all users out there? Or is there a separate set of data for each user?
How is the data going to be served to the client, my guess here is that you would be having a web service or otherwise that might return a JSON.
From a security standpoint, do you want someone to be able to just "grab" the data and run?
Personally I find that a database if often a better choice, but otherwise i would use an XML file. Keep in mind though that you have to be careful with loading/reading of XML files to serve web requests to prevent any potential file locking issues.
Use an XML file that is web-accessible. Then you can query the XML file from the browser if need be, and still parse/write it in PHP. You'll want to use the flock function in PHP to make sure that two instances of a page don't try to write to the file at the same time.
Write it to a file and save the data as a serialized object. This way when you read in the data it's instantly accessible as the variable type you need (array, obj, etc). This will be faster than XML parsing.
I have some jquery/php interaction set up on a page. It submits some data to the server and gets back records of data which are then to be aligned on the page for comparison and possible action beyond that.
My question is what is the best practice for returning the info and then displaying it?
Return JSON object and then create
html on the fly with js and display
the data?
Return JSON object and then
put that data in already created
containers for the data on the page?
Return pure html from the server and
just put that on the page?
I was rolling these through my head last night and couldn't really figure out if one way would be better for any particular reason.
I'm not a js guru so wasn't really sure the pros/cons and caveats to these different methods.
I think it ends up depending on your app.
Pure HTML is the easiest, you just drop in in place and viola. JQuery makes it a breeze to add the proper events and what not.
However, whenever I've used AJAX it's always evolved into returning JSON and building elements on the fly. If you are populating a tree for example, it may become messy to get the proper nesting. This forces you to have to do client side code anyway at which point simply using JSON from the start is cleaner.
Also, If you plan to use the data calls from other pages then using JSON is the way to go because the HTML will bee fixed.
This completely depends on the way you have things set up in your application. I, for one, prefer to return JSON (second approach in your list), because I have an 'error code' parameter that I check in onSuccess function before updating the content on the page, and if it's not zero then I notify the user of the error, including the error message that came back from the server (server-side validation, database timeout, etc.).
I think you're missing a perfectly valid option, one which I use often. This is my typical schema and it has yet to fail me... :-)
Here's the basic jQuery template I use:
$(function() {
$.getJSON('/some/page',{foo:bar,bar:foo},function(json) {
if(json.outcome == 'success') {
$('body').prepend(json.html);
} else {
// Somehow let the user know why it didn't work
alert(json.error);
}
});
});
Here's the basic backend (PHP in my case) structure I use:
<?php // Page: '/some/page'
/* Blah Blah Blah... do whatever needs to be done... */
// If everything turns out okay (assuming '$output' is the HTML
// you want to display...
echo json_encode(array('outcome'=>'success','html'=>$output));
// If something goes wrong... just do:
echo json_encode(array('outcome'=>'error','error'=>'Uh oh... something is broken'));
Naturally, you'll want to be more specific with your error by putting them into some variable or something. But, you should get the idea. Also, of course you can add more information to the json output. You can have some pre-made HTML and also some other information like a 'success notice' or a new class name for some element, I dunno... whatever... the possibilities are endless.
Anyways, the reason I choose this route is because it's usually faster (based on my experience) to append pre-made HTML to the DOM rather than looping over JSON and inserting the stuff unless it's just, like, a bit of text to replace into an element. But, the method I've shown is, IMO, the best of both worlds. You can attach HTML as a string to one of the JSON properties.
Happy jQuerying :-)
The "possible action beyond that" part of your question makes a big difference. If you need to do other things with the data besides display it, returning as JSON is a clearly better option because you can work with the data as a native JavaScript object instead of having to traverse the HTML DOM. If all you ever intend to do is display it, I don't see any reason to go through the trouble of building that display in JavaScript; just build the HTML in your presentation layer on the server.
This came up recently and possible a dupe: The AJAX response: Data (JSON, XML) or HTML snippet?.
If you are going to be creating HTML then you may as well be returning HTML directly and inject it into the DOM. However, there are times you need to work with objects which is where JSON comes in handy.
If you return a Person object for example then you can greet Person.Name and show Person.Preferences which is really handy. It depends on your design but the general considerations should be to keep HTML out of Javascript unless you're building RIA.
I have used all three and have come to the conclusion that returning HTML is better when introducing new elements to a page.
My experiance is that when building HTML with javascript I am usually replicating work that will have already have been done for the non javascript user journey.
I still prefer parsing json for updating existing elements or creating javascript only functionality. I tell myself this for bandwidth, but I think it just because I love javascript.
As a forth option, I read a great post about how Flickr deal with vast quantities of data with string concatination. Basically just parse a big o' string down the pipe and chop it up on the client. This significantly reduces the on the server, with only a marginal increase on the client.
Returning pure HTML is the best solution. For the most part gzip should neutralize any difference in bandwidth, and rendering via javascript on the client can be slow if the client is a crappy machine. Finally, writing javascript to render HTML is hard to work with compared to using something nice like a view if you use MVC.