I'm working on a tooltip-esque application for a webpage, and want a Javascript event to be fired each time a user moves over a word.
Currently I have it working by putting a <span> tag around each word individually, e.g. <span id="word1">word1</span> <span id="word2">word2</span> <span id="word3">word3</span> and then handling the mouseover/out events for each.
This works OK, but sometimes the input text is thousands of words and all these tags seem to slow the browser (well slow down IE, at least). I use event delegation so there's not thousands of event handlers attached, and it's fast enough once rendered. The problem is the 8+ seconds it can take in the first place to render the individually tagged words when I set it via innerHTML, freezing the browser in the process.
(Edit: Just to clarify what I mean - the user enters a string of text, it's sent to the server by ajax and the HTML tags are added server-side. In the ajax success callback, I set the new HTML by setting the element's innerHTML directly. The delay is all on the the innerHTML setting, not server-side.)
Is there anyway that could be changed to just <span id="line1">word1 word2 word3</span> and still work ? Is there any way of knowing which specific word the user mouseovered without putting an individual tag round each one ?
After coming across this page it turns out this is possible, at least to some extent. The below solution works only in IE, but that's really all I need as the other browsers were sufficiently fast with the individual tags solution anyway.
<script>
function getWordFromEvent (evt)
{
if (document.body && document.body.createTextRange)
{
var range = document.body.createTextRange();
range.moveToPoint(evt.clientX, evt.clientY);
range.expand('word');
document.getElementById("wordMouseIsOver").innerHTML = range.text;
}
}
</script>
<span onMouseMove="getWordFromEvent(event)">word1 word2 word3</span>
<BR>
<span id="wordMouseIsOver"> </span>
use Document Fragment's before you inject the long HTML into your document.
Read John Resig's (creater of the jQuery library) lengthy article on the benefit of using document fragments
Take a look at this link (point 7): http://www.tvidesign.co.uk/blog/improve-your-jquery-25-excellent-tips.aspx#tip7.
You will basically wrap all of your spans inside of a single span/div and then insert that single DOM element.
Related
In tutorials I've learnt to use document.write. Now I understand that by many this is frowned upon. I've tried print(), but then it literally sends it to the printer.
So what are alternatives I should use, and why shouldn't I use document.write? Both w3schools and MDN use document.write.
The reason that your HTML is replaced is because of an evil JavaScript function: document.write().
It is most definitely "bad form." It only works with webpages if you use it on the page load; and if you use it during runtime, it will replace your entire document with the input. And if you're applying it as strict XHTML structure it's not even valid code.
the problem:
document.write writes to the document stream. Calling document.write on a closed (or loaded) document automatically calls document.open which will clear the document.
-- quote from the MDN
document.write() has two henchmen, document.open(), and document.close(). When the HTML document is loading, the document is "open". When the document has finished loading, the document has "closed". Using document.write() at this point will erase your entire (closed) HTML document and replace it with a new (open) document. This means your webpage has erased itself and started writing a new page - from scratch.
I believe document.write() causes the browser to have a performance decrease as well (correct me if I am wrong).
an example:
This example writes output to the HTML document after the page has loaded. Watch document.write()'s evil powers clear the entire document when you press the "exterminate" button:
I am an ordinary HTML page. I am innocent, and purely for informational purposes. Please do not <input type="button" onclick="document.write('This HTML page has been succesfully exterminated.')" value="exterminate"/>
me!
the alternatives:
.innerHTML This is a wonderful alternative, but this attribute has to be attached to the element where you want to put the text.
Example: document.getElementById('output1').innerHTML = 'Some text!';
.createTextNode() is the alternative recommended by the W3C.
Example: var para = document.createElement('p');
para.appendChild(document.createTextNode('Hello, '));
NOTE: This is known to have some performance decreases (slower than .innerHTML). I recommend using .innerHTML instead.
the example with the .innerHTML alternative:
I am an ordinary HTML page.
I am innocent, and purely for informational purposes.
Please do not
<input type="button" onclick="document.getElementById('output1').innerHTML = 'There was an error exterminating this page. Please replace <code>.innerHTML</code> with <code>document.write()</code> to complete extermination.';" value="exterminate"/>
me!
<p id="output1"></p>
Here is code that should replace document.write in-place:
document.write=function(s){
var scripts = document.getElementsByTagName('script');
var lastScript = scripts[scripts.length-1];
lastScript.insertAdjacentHTML("beforebegin", s);
}
You can combine insertAdjacentHTML method and document.currentScript property.
The insertAdjacentHTML() method of the Element interface parses the specified text as HTML or XML and inserts the resulting nodes into the DOM tree at a specified position:
'beforebegin': Before the element itself.
'afterbegin': Just inside the element, before its first child.
'beforeend': Just inside the element, after its last child.
'afterend': After the element itself.
The document.currentScript property returns the <script> element whose script is currently being processed. Best position will be beforebegin — new HTML will be inserted before <script> itself. To match document.write's native behavior, one would position the text afterend, but then the nodes from consecutive calls to the function aren't placed in the same order as you called them (like document.write does), but in reverse. The order in which your HTML appears is probably more important than where they're place relative to the <script> tag, hence the use of beforebegin.
document.currentScript.insertAdjacentHTML(
'beforebegin',
'This is a document.write alternative'
)
As a recommended alternative to document.write you could use DOM manipulation to directly query and add node elements to the DOM.
Just dropping a note here to say that, although using document.write is highly frowned upon due to performance concerns (synchronous DOM injection and evaluation), there is also no actual 1:1 alternative if you are using document.write to inject script tags on demand.
There are a lot of great ways to avoid having to do this (e.g. script loaders like RequireJS that manage your dependency chains) but they are more invasive and so are best used throughout the site/application.
I fail to see the problem with document.write. If you are using it before the onload event fires, as you presumably are, to build elements from structured data for instance, it is the appropriate tool to use. There is no performance advantage to using insertAdjacentHTML or explicitly adding nodes to the DOM after it has been built. I just tested it three different ways with an old script I once used to schedule incoming modem calls for a 24/7 service on a bank of 4 modems.
By the time it is finished this script creates over 3000 DOM nodes, mostly table cells. On a 7 year old PC running Firefox on Vista, this little exercise takes less than 2 seconds using document.write from a local 12kb source file and three 1px GIFs which are re-used about 2000 times. The page just pops into existence fully formed, ready to handle events.
Using insertAdjacentHTML is not a direct substitute as the browser closes tags which the script requires remain open, and takes twice as long to ultimately create a mangled page. Writing all the pieces to a string and then passing it to insertAdjacentHTML takes even longer, but at least you get the page as designed. Other options (like manually re-building the DOM one node at a time) are so ridiculous that I'm not even going there.
Sometimes document.write is the thing to use. The fact that it is one of the oldest methods in JavaScript is not a point against it, but a point in its favor - it is highly optimized code which does exactly what it was intended to do and has been doing since its inception.
It's nice to know that there are alternative post-load methods available, but it must be understood that these are intended for a different purpose entirely; namely modifying the DOM after it has been created and memory allocated to it. It is inherently more resource-intensive to use these methods if your script is intended to write the HTML from which the browser creates the DOM in the first place.
Just write it and let the browser and interpreter do the work. That's what they are there for.
PS: I just tested using an onload param in the body tag and even at this point the document is still open and document.write() functions as intended. Also, there is no perceivable performance difference between the various methods in the latest version of Firefox. Of course there is a ton of caching probably going on somewhere in the hardware/software stack, but that's the point really - let the machine do the work. It may make a difference on a cheap smartphone though. Cheers!
The question depends on what you are actually trying to do.
Usually, instead of doing document.write you can use someElement.innerHTML or better, document.createElement with an someElement.appendChild.
You can also consider using a library like jQuery and using the modification functions in there: http://api.jquery.com/category/manipulation/
This is probably the most correct, direct replacement: insertAdjacentHTML.
Try to use getElementById() or getElementsByName() to access a specific element and then to use innerHTML property:
<html>
<body>
<div id="myDiv1"></div>
<div id="myDiv2"></div>
</body>
<script type="text/javascript">
var myDiv1 = document.getElementById("myDiv1");
var myDiv2 = document.getElementById("myDiv2");
myDiv1.innerHTML = "<b>Content of 1st DIV</b>";
myDiv2.innerHTML = "<i>Content of second DIV element</i>";
</script>
</html>
Use
var documentwrite =(value, method="", display="")=>{
switch(display) {
case "block":
var x = document.createElement("p");
break;
case "inline":
var x = document.createElement("span");
break;
default:
var x = document.createElement("p");
}
var t = document.createTextNode(value);
x.appendChild(t);
if(method==""){
document.body.appendChild(x);
}
else{
document.querySelector(method).appendChild(x);
}
}
and call the function based on your requirement as below
documentwrite("My sample text"); //print value inside body
documentwrite("My sample text inside id", "#demoid", "block"); // print value inside id and display block
documentwrite("My sample text inside class", ".democlass","inline"); // print value inside class and and display inline
I'm not sure if this will work exactly, but I thought of
var docwrite = function(doc) {
document.write(doc);
};
This solved the problem with the error messages for me.
I'm making a Chrome extension that replaces certain text on a page with new text and a link. To do this I'm using document.body.innerHTML, which I've read breaks the DOM. When the extension is enabled it seems to break the loading of YouTube videos and pages at codepen.io. I've tried to fix this by excluding YouTube and codepen in the manifest, and by filtering them out in the code below, but it doesn't seem to be working.
Can anyone suggest an alternative to using document.body.innerHTML or see other problems in my code that may be breaking page loads? Thanks.
var texts=["some text","more text"];
if(!window.location.href.includes("www.google.com")||!window.location.href.includes("youtube.com")||!window.location.href.includes("codepen.io")){
for(var i=0;i<texts.length;i++){
if(document.documentElement.textContent || document.documentElement.innerText.includes(texts[i])){
var regex = new RegExp(texts[i],'g');
document.body.innerHTML = document.body.innerHTML.replace(regex,
"<a href='https://www.somesite.org'>replacement text</a>");
}
}
}
Using innerHTML to do this is like using a shotgun to do brain surgery. Not to mention that this can even result in invalid HTML. You will end up having to whitelist every single website that uses any JavaScript at this rate, which is obviously not feasible.
The correct way to do it is to not touch innerHTML at all. Recursively iterate through all the DOM nodes (using firstChild, nextSibling) on the page and look for matches in text nodes. When you find one, replace that single node (replaceChild) with your link (createElement), and new text nodes (createTextNode, appendChild, insertBefore) for any leftover bits.
Essentially you will want to look for a node like:
Text: this is some text that should be linked
And programmatically replace it with nodes like:
Text: this is
Element: a href="..."
Text: replacement text
Text: that should be linked
Additionally if you want to support websites that generate content with JavaScript you'll have to run this replacement process on dynamically inserted content as well. A MutationObserver would be one way to do that, but bear in mind this will probably slow down websites.
After much trial an error and some progress I still can't mange to change every instance of ,- with kr on my website.
I'm very much a beginner at JS and have pieced together the following code from several sources. Is the code the problem or something else?
function skrivkr() {
var skrivkr = $('div').text().replace(/\,-/g, 'kr');
$('p').html(skrivkr);
}
window.onload = skrivkr();
Update:
Thanks for the replies. The site loads jquery 1.10.7.
#Niet the Dark Absol: No, I don't want to put anything in p elements. How do I remove that part? I just want to find all ,- and simply replace with kr without changing any formatting.
Update
OK! Progress, kind of. The ENTIRE content of every <strong> and <dd> now changes to (0), instead of kr. With the odd exception of those tags including ,-. I haven't designed the site myself.
If it helps, one of the ,- appears in the following markup:
<a href="xxxx" rel="nofollow">
<span class="amount">1</span>
<span class="photo">
<img src="xxxx" alt="product name" width="62" height="42">
</span>
<span class="description">
Prtoduct name
<strong>4444,-</strong>
</span>
</a>
And the lastest script I'm applying is:
$(document).ready(function() {
$('strong, dd').html($('strong, dd').html().replace(/,-/g, 'kr'));
});
As has been mentioned innumerable times here on SO, do not try to manipulate the DOM as a string. Pain awaits.
Instead, traverse the DOM, finding text nodes, and perform whatever transformation you want to make on each text node. There are many ways to do that.
In your case, you have many problems, as mentioned already by some of the commenters and responders:
You're setting window.onload to undefined (the result of calling skrivkr), instead of to skrivkr itself.
You're extracting the text value of an element, which consists of the concatenation of all text down all levels, performing the replacement, then sticking it back in with html. This will wipe out all the element structure below.
Minor point, but there's no need to escape the comma in the regexp.
You're extracting the textual content of all div elements in the entire document, transforming it, then adding that back as the content of all p elements in the entire document. It's hard to imagine that's what you want to do.
You can update the content of each div like this
$(document).ready(function() {
$('div').each(function(){
var newText = $(this).html().replace(/,-/g, 'kr');
$(this).html(newText);
});
});
You can remove the var "newText = " and replace it with $(this).html($(this).html().replace(/,-/g, 'kr'));
The first example is easier to understand perhaps if you are new to programming.
You will, however only change the content of text placed in tags.
I would place the text to replace in a div with some predefine class, like "autoKronor", it would then look like this:
<div class="autoKronor">123,-</div>
and
$(document).ready(function() {
$('.autoKronor').each(function(){
var newText = $(this).html().replace(/,-/g, 'kr');
$(this).html(newText);
});
});
to en sure that only text you intended to change gets changed..
Example here: http://jsfiddle.net/akm1uw8h/2/
Also note the use of $(document).ready(); instead of window.onload. It does what you intended to do with window.onload.
if you really want to change EVERY single instance of ",-" to "kr" then you could do this:
$(document).ready(function() {
$('body').html($('body').html().replace(/,-/g, 'kr'));
});
But i strongly advice against the last example because it will be the slowest to compute and more importantly you might change stuff you don't intend to, like any script block inside the page body (with that i mean other javascripts)
I have a js replace function to replace text next to two radio buttons on a pre set form.
Script is as follows.
document.body.innerHTML=document.body.innerHTML.replace("Payment by <b>Moneybookers</b>
e-wallet<br>","");
document.body.innerHTML=document.body.innerHTML.replace("Maestro, Visa and other credit/debit cards by <b>Moneybookers</b>","Pago con Diners Club, Mastercard o Visa");}onload=x;
The script works fine in Chrome and Firefox, however, the script is not actioned in Explorer.
I believe it has something to do with there being , / - within the text I am replacing? When I use the function to replace text with no , / - in the text - it works fine in explorer, however, for example when I try to replace text.. - "Maestro, Visa and other credit/debit cards by Moneybookers" this does not work in explorer.. I'm assuming because of the coma and forward slash. Honestly I've tried everything but just can not get this to work. Any help would be greatly appreciated!!
Not sure whether it's related (I'm a Mac user without IE) but you shouldn't use multiline strings. Use \n instead.
What is returned by innerHTML varies from one browser to an other, because there is no standard about it (the content will be the same, but the way it's displayed can be different). Doing replace like that is likely to fail on some browser. You should just take an other approach to do your replace.
A better approach would be to wrap the text you want to replace with a span, this way you can more easily target the content you want to replace.
<span id="thatFirstThing">Payment by <b>Moneybookers</b>e-wallet<br></span>
An after you can do
document.getElementById("thatFirstThing").innerHTML = "";
P.S.: Doing innerHTML replace on the body also has a huge side-effect. Since you are replacing the content of your hole page. All the event handler that where bind on your page will disappear.
Edit: If you can't modify the HTML page, it's a little bit more tricky, because the DOM is not well adapted to do such thing. What you could do is to target parent element by navigating through the DOM with document.getElementById and childNodes. And once you have your parent element just write the new content you want, without doing replace.
In the end it would look something like this :
document.getElementById("someSection").childNodes[0].childNodes[1].childNodes[0].innerHTML = "";
In tutorials I've learnt to use document.write. Now I understand that by many this is frowned upon. I've tried print(), but then it literally sends it to the printer.
So what are alternatives I should use, and why shouldn't I use document.write? Both w3schools and MDN use document.write.
The reason that your HTML is replaced is because of an evil JavaScript function: document.write().
It is most definitely "bad form." It only works with webpages if you use it on the page load; and if you use it during runtime, it will replace your entire document with the input. And if you're applying it as strict XHTML structure it's not even valid code.
the problem:
document.write writes to the document stream. Calling document.write on a closed (or loaded) document automatically calls document.open which will clear the document.
-- quote from the MDN
document.write() has two henchmen, document.open(), and document.close(). When the HTML document is loading, the document is "open". When the document has finished loading, the document has "closed". Using document.write() at this point will erase your entire (closed) HTML document and replace it with a new (open) document. This means your webpage has erased itself and started writing a new page - from scratch.
I believe document.write() causes the browser to have a performance decrease as well (correct me if I am wrong).
an example:
This example writes output to the HTML document after the page has loaded. Watch document.write()'s evil powers clear the entire document when you press the "exterminate" button:
I am an ordinary HTML page. I am innocent, and purely for informational purposes. Please do not <input type="button" onclick="document.write('This HTML page has been succesfully exterminated.')" value="exterminate"/>
me!
the alternatives:
.innerHTML This is a wonderful alternative, but this attribute has to be attached to the element where you want to put the text.
Example: document.getElementById('output1').innerHTML = 'Some text!';
.createTextNode() is the alternative recommended by the W3C.
Example: var para = document.createElement('p');
para.appendChild(document.createTextNode('Hello, '));
NOTE: This is known to have some performance decreases (slower than .innerHTML). I recommend using .innerHTML instead.
the example with the .innerHTML alternative:
I am an ordinary HTML page.
I am innocent, and purely for informational purposes.
Please do not
<input type="button" onclick="document.getElementById('output1').innerHTML = 'There was an error exterminating this page. Please replace <code>.innerHTML</code> with <code>document.write()</code> to complete extermination.';" value="exterminate"/>
me!
<p id="output1"></p>
Here is code that should replace document.write in-place:
document.write=function(s){
var scripts = document.getElementsByTagName('script');
var lastScript = scripts[scripts.length-1];
lastScript.insertAdjacentHTML("beforebegin", s);
}
You can combine insertAdjacentHTML method and document.currentScript property.
The insertAdjacentHTML() method of the Element interface parses the specified text as HTML or XML and inserts the resulting nodes into the DOM tree at a specified position:
'beforebegin': Before the element itself.
'afterbegin': Just inside the element, before its first child.
'beforeend': Just inside the element, after its last child.
'afterend': After the element itself.
The document.currentScript property returns the <script> element whose script is currently being processed. Best position will be beforebegin — new HTML will be inserted before <script> itself. To match document.write's native behavior, one would position the text afterend, but then the nodes from consecutive calls to the function aren't placed in the same order as you called them (like document.write does), but in reverse. The order in which your HTML appears is probably more important than where they're place relative to the <script> tag, hence the use of beforebegin.
document.currentScript.insertAdjacentHTML(
'beforebegin',
'This is a document.write alternative'
)
As a recommended alternative to document.write you could use DOM manipulation to directly query and add node elements to the DOM.
Just dropping a note here to say that, although using document.write is highly frowned upon due to performance concerns (synchronous DOM injection and evaluation), there is also no actual 1:1 alternative if you are using document.write to inject script tags on demand.
There are a lot of great ways to avoid having to do this (e.g. script loaders like RequireJS that manage your dependency chains) but they are more invasive and so are best used throughout the site/application.
I fail to see the problem with document.write. If you are using it before the onload event fires, as you presumably are, to build elements from structured data for instance, it is the appropriate tool to use. There is no performance advantage to using insertAdjacentHTML or explicitly adding nodes to the DOM after it has been built. I just tested it three different ways with an old script I once used to schedule incoming modem calls for a 24/7 service on a bank of 4 modems.
By the time it is finished this script creates over 3000 DOM nodes, mostly table cells. On a 7 year old PC running Firefox on Vista, this little exercise takes less than 2 seconds using document.write from a local 12kb source file and three 1px GIFs which are re-used about 2000 times. The page just pops into existence fully formed, ready to handle events.
Using insertAdjacentHTML is not a direct substitute as the browser closes tags which the script requires remain open, and takes twice as long to ultimately create a mangled page. Writing all the pieces to a string and then passing it to insertAdjacentHTML takes even longer, but at least you get the page as designed. Other options (like manually re-building the DOM one node at a time) are so ridiculous that I'm not even going there.
Sometimes document.write is the thing to use. The fact that it is one of the oldest methods in JavaScript is not a point against it, but a point in its favor - it is highly optimized code which does exactly what it was intended to do and has been doing since its inception.
It's nice to know that there are alternative post-load methods available, but it must be understood that these are intended for a different purpose entirely; namely modifying the DOM after it has been created and memory allocated to it. It is inherently more resource-intensive to use these methods if your script is intended to write the HTML from which the browser creates the DOM in the first place.
Just write it and let the browser and interpreter do the work. That's what they are there for.
PS: I just tested using an onload param in the body tag and even at this point the document is still open and document.write() functions as intended. Also, there is no perceivable performance difference between the various methods in the latest version of Firefox. Of course there is a ton of caching probably going on somewhere in the hardware/software stack, but that's the point really - let the machine do the work. It may make a difference on a cheap smartphone though. Cheers!
The question depends on what you are actually trying to do.
Usually, instead of doing document.write you can use someElement.innerHTML or better, document.createElement with an someElement.appendChild.
You can also consider using a library like jQuery and using the modification functions in there: http://api.jquery.com/category/manipulation/
This is probably the most correct, direct replacement: insertAdjacentHTML.
Try to use getElementById() or getElementsByName() to access a specific element and then to use innerHTML property:
<html>
<body>
<div id="myDiv1"></div>
<div id="myDiv2"></div>
</body>
<script type="text/javascript">
var myDiv1 = document.getElementById("myDiv1");
var myDiv2 = document.getElementById("myDiv2");
myDiv1.innerHTML = "<b>Content of 1st DIV</b>";
myDiv2.innerHTML = "<i>Content of second DIV element</i>";
</script>
</html>
Use
var documentwrite =(value, method="", display="")=>{
switch(display) {
case "block":
var x = document.createElement("p");
break;
case "inline":
var x = document.createElement("span");
break;
default:
var x = document.createElement("p");
}
var t = document.createTextNode(value);
x.appendChild(t);
if(method==""){
document.body.appendChild(x);
}
else{
document.querySelector(method).appendChild(x);
}
}
and call the function based on your requirement as below
documentwrite("My sample text"); //print value inside body
documentwrite("My sample text inside id", "#demoid", "block"); // print value inside id and display block
documentwrite("My sample text inside class", ".democlass","inline"); // print value inside class and and display inline
I'm not sure if this will work exactly, but I thought of
var docwrite = function(doc) {
document.write(doc);
};
This solved the problem with the error messages for me.