Please note that it's not a question on how to get a bar. I've got that covered, luckily. It's more of a why not issue. When the reality doesn't meet the expectation, there's usually a lesson to be learned. Also, based on the awesomely helpful comments, I realized that the diagnostics were incorrect so I updated the question.
I've just started experimenting with D3. Following the examples, I get some nice graphs. Then, I tested this (just to accumulate knowledge on less usual approach with purely academic purpose).
var graphs = d3.select("#graph").selectAll("div");
graphs.data([1, 2, 3, 4]).enter()
.append("div").text(function(d){ return d; });
The number of DIVs doesn't change. That confuses me, because I'd expect an increment by 4 (if I'm creating a DIV for each such element). When I fiddle the code, it works. However, I'm stuck on how to trouble-shoot it.
I checked that d3.select("#graph") does contain precisely one element.
I've run the script from the console to avoid load order issues.
My page is a partial view rendered by Razor. All other scripts, except jQuery, which I'need to keep as it's called on page load, are removed.
...
<div id="#graph" ...></div>
...
#section style{ #Styles.Render("~/Page.css") }
#section script{
#Scripts.Render("~/Page.js")
#Scripts.Render("~/Scripts/d3.min.js")
}
I see three things in your code. First of all, using the selector d3.("#graph") refers to <div id="graph" />. You've got a sharp sign in the id of the HTML. That's why you don't see the number of elements increase - they're created into a different component. Use this, instead.
<div id="graph" ...>
An additional point's the order of your scripts. You markup is wrong because you read in Page.js before d3.min.js. If you're not getting errors because of lacking d3 in the onload of your page (which I'm assuming is in the first one), then you've got multiple references to it. This one is unneeded because you've got a global one covering it. Or you can switch the order of scripts like this and skip the global one.
#section script{
#Scripts.Render("~/Scripts/d3.min.js")
#Scripts.Render("~/Page.js")
}
Last point's about your sections. I'm assuming they're called from the layout and that this is only a partial view. If so, keep an eye on the order of rendering. Invoking the rendering of sections in partial views at different stages of the layout can create issues.
Related
I am new to knockout, so going to fire a lot of questions. But I'm not new to data binding. So I am knocking my head on the difference between my expectations and reality. Here is a very basic question about applyBindings.
It looks like applyBindings has the parameter "view model", which is to me the domain object graph (as javascript objects) plus perhaps additional helper things added for the purpose of the view creation. But what I am completely missing at first is the scope of the bindings! I expected this to be applied to the current parent DOM element. But no, it is applied globally, in the entire page!
So is the expectation that in one HTML document there can only ever be one view model? This is very surprising to me! How am I supposed to create a single page web app where I have one panel showing the address book, another panel showing my appointments, another panel showing one loan application to review, and yet another showing the underwriting of another loan? They are all completely different things, am I really supposed to link them all into a single view model???
In my expectation, you bind a javascript object to a DOM element, and everything in there renders it. With every new nested DOM element, the focus object may change. It may be flowing out of some foreach binding from the parent's object. But then two sibling (or cousin) DOM elements might be sitting side by side and having completely different view model, and also a different life cycle. Like while I am in my underwriting workflow, I quickly need to bring up an address book or my calendar. All of it in a single page app. There should be no global interference between different view models used by different unrelated DOM elements.
And yet here we are with knockout I see it has only one ko.applyBindings(viewModelObject) for a the entire page.
What am I missing? What is preventing us from modifying ko.applyBindings to take two arguments, the view model-object and the DOM element in which to show it? I could try doing that, but I am afraid if knockout has been designed in this global mindset, there might be lots of issues running the knockout machinery more than once on the same page?
I'm sorry if I am frustrating people by shooting an answer already. But since I have a very urgent project I need to try to resolve my issues ASAP, and I am reading the knockout source code, which is quite nicely organized and uses good names, so it's quite intelligible; therefore I have found the answer myself.
The answer is that, yes, you can applyBindings to a parent element that you choose. The document.body is only the default if you don't say anything.
Therefore, from now on, I shall (tell my team to) always call applyBindings with the second argument specified for the rootNode. Like this:
<div>
... all my UI elements for this thing ...
... then last element in this div:
<script type="text/javascript">ko.applyBindings(viewModelObject, document.currentScript.parentElement);</script>
</div>
so, that way I can have multiple view models each in their own DOM element.
And additionally also, I was wondering, does knockout not somehow assign the model object to the DOM element? I could do that in my script tag too:
<div>
... all my UI elements for this thing ...
... then last element in this div:
<script type="text/javascript">
const viewElement = document.currentScript.parentElement;
viewElement.viewModelObject = viewModelObject;
ko.applyBindings(viewModelObject, viewElement);
</script>
</div>
and this allows me then -- if only for debugging -- to find the current view model object on the DOM element that is the root of a view. (It would be nice if that would happen with all other descendant bindings too, but that is perhaps the subject of another question.)
In fact, I decided to put into our general configuration a hard replacement of the ko.applyBindings function:
ko._applyBindings = ko.applyBindings;
ko.applyBindings(viewModelObject, rootNode, extendContextCallback) {
rootNode = rootNode || document.currentScript.parentElement;
rootNode.viewModelObject = viewModelObject;
ko._applyBindings(viewModelObject, rootNode, extendContextCallback);
}
now I don't even have to convince my team to do it this way, they will automatically, even without being aware of it.
I am working on a simple Cordova app with about 4 page types and I am trying to think through which is the better way to handle the inner HTML templates.
Hidden HTML hard coded into the HTML files that is hidden and populated/revealed by my JS.
Using a JS template system and appending and removing from the DOM.
I feel that appending all that to the DOM for a page is inefficient when I could just update the sections that change. But perhaps an append is lightweight enough where I shouldn't worry about it.
There are a number of ways you can do it. In terms of load on the browser. That is hard to say. From your question it is hard to know what is in these pages, what are you displaying, is it live data, static html etc.
When you first plot out an app, if you are from the old class of building multiple page websites, it can be a little concerning as to how well your app/page will run with all those pages crammed in to one, and all that data plus code.
The answer is, amazingly well. If done properly in modern browsers, and for example Ipads the app will run to near native performance.
The options you have are
Map all the pages into one HTML document. Hide each page content using css display:none, flip them into view using css animation, fading or just display:block.
Use a javascript routing library to map urls to blocks of code that deal with each page, this makes mapping out your app much easier, and means that buttons can just link to your pages, like a real website. see http://projects.jga.me/routie/
Building all the page templates into one page can make it hard to code, as the page becomes enormous, consider breaking the inner content of each page into separate files, you can then give each page holder a url and use a small xhr request to load the page on-the fly, once loaded you can cache it into memory or even local-storage, depending on whether you remove it when it is closed or keep it hidden.
In my experience you can put an enormous number or nodes into one page and have very little speed drop, bear in mind if you use something like jquery and do a lot of $(".page > .page1 > .items li") your going to have a slow app.
Tips
Use element ID's everywhere document.getElementById(..) is 100's of times faster in a loop that $(...)
cache elements when you find them, if you need them later store them in a memory cache.
keep for loop inner code to a minimum.
use a decent click touch libary like http://hammerjs.github.io/ and delegate all the events of the body tag or at least on each page.
If you need to touch the server, load data, think dom first, device second server later. A good app is a responsive app, that responds to the user instantly.
I know this has been posted a while ago, but for the sake of the users I am going to add my answer.
I completely agree with MartinWebb but my answer will shed some light on the results of his options. I am currently working on a similar project. Please note that this answer pertains to cordova (previously called phonegap) specifically. My app has about 5 pages with +-20 different components (input's, div's, h1's, p's, etc.). This is what i tried and the result of each:
jQuery was my first option, mainly because it is easy to use and reduces the amount of code required to accomplish a said goal. Result: First time I tried this approach I though I would spice it up with animations and transformations. The result of this was a very unresponsive app. I removed the animation and transformation, however due to the nature of my application I required multiple dynamically added components and jQuery just wasn't up for the task.
Css display:none and visible:hidden was my next option. I used javascript's dom to display certain div's. Result: This works if your not planning on switching many div shortly after one another eg. a simple menu. It quickly became apparent that this wasn't going to work. Also this does not eliminate my need for the dom. Remember document.getElementById('menu').style.display = "none"; is still part of the dom. This as a solution, for me, is poor. There is a reason that var menu= document.createElement('div'); is part of the language. Which brings me to my last option.
Building a page 90% on javascript's dom was my last option. Logically I could not see how 600 lines of code cold trump one .innerHTML or .style.display = "block"; but it did. Result: It was by far the most responsive of all the solutions.
I'm not saying that all webpages should be coded with dom appending, but as I stated previously, for a cordova app of a few pages (<6), with a few components a javascript dom appending approach would be best. It takes longer to code, but you will be rewarded with control and efficiency. I would suggest coding the backbone of your app in html and populating and controlling with javascript's dom.
Best of luck.
The first option, <div>s with display:none; would be more efficient by a small margin, but you can get the best of both worlds by compiling your JavaScript and templates together into a single file using something like browserify or require.js.
I have made a framework that generates a HTML "DOM" tree on the server, as a tree of python objects, and then spits it out as a string to be sent to the client. The way it does this is via a recursive depth-first traversal of the tree: for example a div would spit out the opening "div", spit out all it's children's html and then spit out the closing "/div".
This tree is broken down into conceptual components, as shown below:
graph http://lhy.mit.edu/media/Flow_Chart.png
This only shows the first two levels of hierarchy; the actual site has many more: for example each comment in the comment bar is a self contained component, each button on the menu bar is a self contained component. As you can see, the various components do not need to be on the same depth in the tree. What constitutes a "component" is decided by me.
What I want is the complete html string for each component (everything from the root node of that component downwards), as well as the partial HTML string for every component (The HTML of that component, minus the HTML of its children). The partial HTML of main section, for example, would be the html, head and two div tags only. The complete html of main section, on the other hand, would be every node on the page.
How would i do this? I could just find the complete HTML string of every component and sub-component, mark the boundaries of each sub-component with some string and do Regex-Removals in order to find the partial HTML string for every component, but that feels clunky and inefficient.
I could do an iterative-deepening DFS, halting at the boundary between a component and its sub-components until every node in that component has been explored. I would then have the partial HTML for every component but then i would need to do a similarly hacky Regex-Inserts to later build up the complete HTML for every component.
I could do both, but that would take two passes and would be expensive, though maybe not as expensive as the above Regex gymnastics.
I could do a priority-queue Dijkstra's, having each component be strictly higher priority than its children. It would traverse the tree in the correct order, finishing each component before moving on to its children, but i have no idea how i would get the final well-formed HTML string out of it.
The purpose of all this is so the server can intelligently and completely autonomously determine the minimal set of components on the client's page that need to change on a page-transition between two arbitrary pages.
If i create a new page on my site, I should need no more than Zero extra lines of code to have it ajax smoothly with any existing page.
But first i need to get my graph-traversing html-spewing algorithms in order. Any ideas?
I am presuming your client is Javscript code as you didn't specify anything.
Don't do anything too complicated. In particular, for the love of god don't try using regexes to work with HTML.
Is your server sending you a fully funciton HTML string? In this case, you can convert this into an actual DOM you can work with (there are many ways to do so) and then use the .innerHTML of an element to get your "complete html"s and use the .tagName to get a tag's name.
I still don't really get why you need all this complication. If you already went through the trouble of downloading the whole "new page" there isn't too much of a reason to try to change as few parts as possible - just replace averything and forget about it (the calls to the server should be the most expensive thing anyway).
If you really want to use less brute force, than you should find a way to request/be notified of only the interesting changes without having to look at everything. Then, given the part that is to be changed and the text, you just need to do something like
document.getElementById('mainCommentArea').innerHTML = newHTML;
I have seen many questions raised around PartialViews and Javascript: the problem is a PartialView that requires Javascript, e.g. a view that renders a jqGrid:
The partial View needs a <div id="myGrid"></div>
and then some script:
<script>
$(document).ready(function(){
$('#myGrid').jqGrid( { // config params go here
});
}
</script>
The issue is how to include the PartialView without littering the page with inline tags and multiple $(document).ready tags.
We would also like to club the results from multiple RenderPartial calls into a single document.Ready() call.
And lastly we have the issue of the Javascript library files such as JQuery and JQGrid.js which should ideally be included at the bottom of the page (right before the $.ready block) and ideally only included when the appropriate PartialViews are used on the page.
In scouring the WWW it does not appear that anyone has solved this issue. A potential way might be to implement a custom View Engine. I was wondering if anyone had any alternative suggestions I may have missed?
This is a good question and it is something my team struggled with when JQuery was first released. One colleague wrote a page base class that combined all of the document ready calls into one, but it was a complete waste of time and our client's money.
There is no need to combine the $(document).ready() calls into one as they will all be called, one after the other in the order that they appear on the page. this is due to the multi-cast delegate nature of the method and it won't have a significant affect on performance. You might find your page slightly more maintainable, but maintainability is seldom an issue with jQuery as it has such concise syntax.
Could you expand on the reasons for wanting to combine them? I find a lot of developers are perfectionists and want their markup to be absolutely perfect. Rather, I find that when it is good enough for the client, when it performs adequately and displays properly, then my time is better spent delivering the next requirement. I have wasted a lot of time in the past formatting HTML that no-one will ever look at.
Any script that you want to appear at the bottom of the page should go inside the ClientScriptManager.RegisterStartupScript Method as it renders at the bottom of the page.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/z9h4dk8y.aspx
Edit Just noticed that your question was specific to ASP.NET MVC. My answer is more of an ASP.NET answer but in terms of the rendered html, most of my comments are still relevant. Multiple document.ready functions are not a problem.
The standard jQuery approach is to write a single script that will add behaviour to multiple elements. So, add a class to the divs that you want to contain a grid and call a function on each one:
<script language="text/javascript">
$(document).ready(function(){
$('.myGridClass').each(function(){
$(this).jqGrid( {
// config params can be determined from
//attributes added to the div element
var url = $(this).attr("data-url");
});
});
}
</script>
You only need to add this script once on your page and in your partial views you just have:
<div class="myGridClass" data-url="http://whatever-url-to-be-used"></div>
Notice the data-url attribute. This is HTML5 syntax, which will fail HTML 4 validation. It will still work in HTML 4 browsers. It only matters if you have to run your pages through html validators. And I can see you already know about HTML5
Not pretty but as regards your last point can you not send the appropriate tags as a ViewData dictionary in the action that returns the partial?
I have been tasked with improving the current mess that is our JavaScript "strategy"; we're an online shopping company and my boss has given me time to do this properly. He is very keen on keepin this modular and increase the reusability of the components.
Our HTML is being rendered with JSP and we have lots of custom tags writing out, for example, information about products without the web designers needing to worry about it.
Now, we want to do similar things with JavaScript. The web designers should be given a set of custom tags, like, say,
<foo:draggable>
... some HTML here ...
</foo:draggable>
that will wrap the HTML in a <div> with a drag bar at the top and a close button.
My idea is to mark the div with a unique namespaced CSS class name, like foo_draggable, and then put all my functions in a single JS file. That JS file then sees if there are elements with the CSS class foo_draggable in the DOM and if it finds any it will attach the required event handlers.
However, I am worried about scaling problems, and wondering whether it is a good idea to have lots of selector queries running when they quite often aren't going to be used.
The first alternative would be to initiate each draggable item explicitly but that would mean putting <script> tags all over the place. The second approach would be to not put all UI function in one file but rather just download the ones I need, but that would mean lots more HTTP requests and slower page load speed.
Has anyone got experience with this?
What about having two classnames?
<div class='foo fooDragable'></div>
<div class='foo fooSortable'></div>
You add the class 'foo' to all your elements that require javascript modification.
Your javascript has to check the dom only once for foo.
var $foo = $('.foo');
Afterwards you can search within this array which should be way smaller than the complete dom.
var $dragAble = $foo.filter('.fooDragable');
Have you considered or taken a look to JSF? I know it's a major change if you aren't using JSF yet. But there are lot of ready-to-use JSF component libaries with an ajaxical sauce, for example RichFaces, IceFaces, PrimeFaces, etc. It's almost a waste of time to create components/tags for it yourself.
Alternatively you can replace all Javascripts to use the great jQuery JS framework.
Depending on how many separate components you have, the extra overhead of running the selectors might not be a big deal. You can initialize all the components just the once, when the page is loaded. Anything that's not present on the page simply won't get initialized, and will incur no further overhead. In most JavaScript frameworks, selecting by classname (or tag name) is pretty fast. It's only the complex selectors, which aren't natively supported by the browser, that are slow.
If you have a few commonly used components, and then a set of less commonly used ones, it may be worth splitting those up. Keep the commonly used components in a single JavaScript file (minified, served with compression and aggressive caching), and load that in every page, regardless of whether it's needed or not. Caching will ensure it's only downloaded once, and it'll only be one small HTTP request. For the less common components, keep them in separate files (ideally, one per component), and add a script tag on pages that use them.
I'm not entirely familiar with how JSP works, but it might be possible to do this automatically - if a tag is included in the document, add a script tag for foo_widget.js in the document header, or something like that.