Altering innerText in an Angular directive - angularjs

This seems to me like it should be straight-forward, but I think I'm misunderstanding the order of operations here. The documentation is a bit tough for me to digest and the answers I've found here have led me closer to an answer but not quite far enough.
I'm trying to place a scope variable (containing a string) onto the DOM using a directive and I want to manipulate that text and eventually create a "Read More" text truncation function.
HTML snippet:
<read-more>{{ commentary }}</read-more>
Angular/Coffeescript:
app.directive('readMore', [ ->
restrict: 'E'
scope: false
link: (scope, element, attrs) ->
console.log(element[0])
element[0].innerText = element[0].innerText.substring(0, 125) + "..."
])
The text from that variable gets read into the DOM, and console logs the element as <read-more ng-class="ng-binding"> and the {{ commentary }} string is printed in the console between the tags, however, my function doesn't manipulate it.
I know it's the correct element (and index), but for some reason innerText and innerHTML don't affect what is on the DOM.
If I change the return line in the link function to:
element[0].innerText = "Foo"
I get nothing between the <read-more> tags in the console and, naturally, the DOM now has no content in there.
What am I missing about how link deals with this element on the DOM?

My understanding is that element you are dealing here is not the JS element you are dealing for example in a standard jQuery function. This is angularjs element, Instead of DOM manypulation, I would rather create a directive that sets the model of the "Read More" element, and also hides the entire text that needs to be displayed after click on it. But do that only via angularjs ng-model directive, not by DOM manipulation.

You doesn't need DOM for angular.
Here show you a few ways to bind content:
http://plnkr.co/edit/OSWIy0?p=preview
Use this
link: function($scope) {
$scope.otherText = 'Here more text. For example, this maybe come from http-stream.';
}
instead this:
element[0].innerText = element[0].innerText.substring(0, 125) + "..."
Good luck. :-)

Angular provides a wrapper for the element using jQuery (if available) or jQLite, so use the html or text function:
link: (scope, element, attrs) ->
commentString = element.html() ## alternatively use element.text()
Note, however, that both the text and html functions will return the unevaluated string {{ commentary }} rather than whatever string value the commentary variable holds.
To get around this, simply address commentary using the scope argument passed to the directive's link function.
link: (scope, element, attrs) ->
commentString = scope.commentary
... ## perform string manipulation here
element.text(newCommentString)
This will set the element text to whatever string you pass to it. As for updating the text: if something like "read more" is clicked, have an event handler ready (still inside of link:, like so:
element.on('click', ->
element.text(commentString) ## the full commentary string from above
)

Related

AngularJS: How to access attributes defined inside directive from outside

I am using a directive for putting ellipsis on text overflow called angular-ellipsis. If there is enough room for the text, angular-ellipsis doesn't applythe ...'s. I need to know if the ellipsis is being applied to some text or not.
Looking into the code for the directive I can see that it has an attribute that seems to match what I am looking for - attribute.isTruncated:
compile: function(elem, attr, linker) {
return function(scope, element, attributes) {
/* State Variables */
attributes.isTruncated = false;
It also seems to do something similar by setting the 'data-overflowed' attribute of the element like thus:
element.attr('data-overflowed', 'false');
Here is a link to the code for the directive, it's not too complicated or long:
https://github.com/dibari/angular-ellipsis/blob/master/src/angular-ellipsis.js
I am wondering can I access either of these attributes from my Controller, and if so how? Forgive me if this is obvious, but I completely new to directives...
Remember the "JS" in AngularJS.
If you can find your element by its id or class attribute, then you should be able query it with plain javascript, by using querySelector and getAttribute:
document.querySelector("#element-id").getAttribute('data-overflowed');
It's not a perfect solution because in some test frameworks, you are not guaranteed to have the document interface (that's why Angular has the $document wrapper), but it gets you what you need (without jQuery!). It would have been simpler if jqLite (which is used by angular.element) had enabled find by ID or classname, and not just by tag name.

Angularjs: how to clone an element, uninterpolated

I have a directive that clones its element, passes the clone through $compile(myClone)(scope); and appends it to the DOM.
If the original element has transcluded content, ex: This is some content {{withVariable}}
How can I clone it with the angularjs expressions uninterpolated, so that the cloned element has the expressions (and thus the same dynamic content as the original), rather than the values as resolved at the time of cloning?
If I use ng-bind directive, it work as desired.
ex. This is some content <span ng-bind="withVariable"></span>
Ok, I found a solution using transclude: true on my directive.
And then I have in the link function:
link: function (scope, element, attrs , uiScrollpoint, transclude ){
transclude(scope, function(clone, scope){
// stash the un-interpolated innerHTML
element[0].srcHTML = clone[0].innerHTML;
element.append($compile(clone)(scope));
});
}
When I clone the element, I retrieve the srcHTML before compiling:
var myClone = element.clone();
if(element[0].srcHTML){
myClone[0].innerHTML = element[0].srcHTML;
}
$compile(myClone)(scope);
It seems to work, but I do see the limitation that if the original element's source is modified on the fly by JS DOM-manipulation functions that srcHTML wouldn't stay in sync. I'm thinking that this would be a pretty rare case though.
Maybe there is a better way to do this? If it's possible to get the uninterpolated HTML at clone time rather than only at transclusion time, that would really be the best.

In the transclude function of a directive link function, how is "futureParentElement" used?

In the angular documentation for the compile service (starting at line 412) there is a description of the transclude function that is passed into the linking function of a directive.
The relevant part reads:
function([scope], cloneLinkingFn, futureParentElement)
In which (line 212):
futureParentElement: defines the parent to which the cloneLinkingFn will add the cloned elements.
default: $element.parent() resp. $element for transclude:'element' resp. transclude:true.
only needed for transcludes that are allowed to contain non html elements (e.g. SVG elements)
and when the cloneLinkinFn is passed,
as those elements need to created and cloned in a special way when they are defined outside their usual containers (e.g. like <svg>).
See also the directive.templateNamespace property.
I fail to see the point of futureParentElement however. It says
defines the parent to which the cloneLinkingFn will add the cloned elements.
But you do that in the cloneLinkingFn itself like this:
transclude(scope, function (clone) {
some_element.append(clone);
});
And you can't use the transclude function without defining the cloning function in the first place.
What is the proper usage/a use for futureParentElement?
The answer to this can be found by looking at the the git blame of compile.js: the commit that added futureParentElement is https://github.com/angular/angular.js/commit/ffbd276d6def6ff35bfdb30553346e985f4a0de6
In the commit there is a test that tests a directive svgCustomTranscludeContainer
directive('svgCustomTranscludeContainer', function() {
return {
template: '<svg width="400" height="400"></svg>',
transclude: true,
link: function(scope, element, attr, ctrls, $transclude) {
var futureParent = element.children().eq(0);
$transclude(function(clone) {
futureParent.append(clone);
}, futureParent);
}
};
});
by testing how compiling the html <svg-custom-transclude-container><circle cx="2" cy="2" r="1"></circle> behaves:
it('should handle directives with templates that manually add the transclude further down', inject(function() {
element = jqLite('<div><svg-custom-transclude-container>' +
'<circle cx="2" cy="2" r="1"></circle></svg-custom-transclude-container>' +
'</div>');
$compile(element.contents())($rootScope);
document.body.appendChild(element[0]);
var circle = element.find('circle');
assertIsValidSvgCircle(circle[0]);
}));
So it looks like if you are creating an SVG image with a directive whose template wraps transcluded SVG content in <svg> ... </svg> tags, then that SVG image won't be valid (by some definition), if you don't pass the correct futureParentElement to $transclude.
Trying to see what it actually means not to be valid, beyond the test in the source code, I created 2 directives based on the ones in the unit test, and used them to try to create an SVG image with partial circle. One using the futureParentElement:
<div><svg-custom-transclude-container-with-future><circle cx="1" cy="2" r="20"></circle></svg-custom-transclude-container></div>
and one that is identical but that doesn't:
<div><svg-custom-transclude-container-without-future><circle cx="2" cy="2" r="20"></circle></svg-custom-transclude-container></div>
As can be seen at http://plnkr.co/edit/meRZylSgNWXhBVqP1Pa7?p=preview, the one with the futureParentElement shows the partial circle, and the one without doesn't. The structure of the DOM appears identical. However Chrome seems to report that the second circle element isn't an SVG node, but a plain HTML node.
So whatever futureParentElement actually does under the hood, it seems to make sure that transcluded SVG content ends up being handled as SVG by the browser.

Angular interpret {{}} inside a link function of a custom directive

Is there a way to interpret the content of a div having my directive as an attribute :
example :
<div my-directive>{{1+1}}</div>
and my link function looks like this :
link = (scope, element, attrs) =>
interpretedString = element.text()
in this example interpretedString is equal to {{1+1}} instead of 2
any help? the scope.$eval evaluates attributes, but what if I want to evaluate the text of a directive?
thanks
In order to interpret the string, you need to interpolate it thanks to the angular's $interpolate service.
Example:
link = (scope, element, attrs) =>
interpretedString = $interpolate(element.text())(scope)
Just to back up a bit, the contents of an element could be anything -- an array of element trees, text nodes, comments, and (unless you declare your directive "terminal") it all gets evaluated recursively and could have directives inside directive. I think you'd be much better off passing an interpolated string as an attribute. I mean you could do it this way, but whoever's using your widget wouldn't really expect that.
Something like:
<div my-directive my-attr="{{1+1}}"></div>
Or even (if that attribute is "primary"):
<div my-directive="{{1+1}}"></div>
From there, instead of $interpolate(element.text())(scope) you'd have $interpolate(attrs.myDirective)(scope)
Of course, the nature of Angular is everything is dynamic and can update all the time. What if the expression didn't just have constants, as a real expression likely wouldn't. If it were:
{{1+foo}}
Then the question is do you care about it changing? If not, $interpolate is fine. It captures the initial value. If you do care about it updating, you should use $observe.
attrs.$observe('myDirective', function(val) {
// if say "foo" is 5, val would be 6 here
});
Then later if you're like scope.foo = 8 the callback runs and passes 9.
Alternative is to do
<my-directive ng-bind="1+1" />
var two = $scope.$eval('ngBind');
:-p
.directive('myDirective', function () {
return {
restrict: 'E',
scope: {
ngBind : '='
},
link: function (scope, element, attrs) {
console.log('expecting string "1+1": '+attrs.ngBind);
console.log('expecting evaluated string "2": '+scope.$eval('ngBind'));
}
};
});
side note: <div ng-bind="val"></div> is almost the same as <div>{{val}}</div>. Except that u save 4 brackets and never see them flashing into view when things might go slower whatsoever reason.

AngularJS Directive to Modify ng-bind and Add Ellipsis

I've made an AngularJS directive to add an ellipsis to overflow: hidden text. It doesn't seem to work in Firefox, and I don't believe I've structured it as well as possible. The flow is:
Add directive attribute to HTML element
Directive reads ng-bind attribute into scope
Directive watches for changes to ng-bind in link function
On ng-bind change, directive does some fancy calculations to determine where text should be split and ellipsis added (I've not included this code here, just assume it works)
Directive sets the element's HTML equal to this new string, not touching ng-bind
HTML
<p data-ng-bind="articleText" data-add-ellipsis></p>
DIRECTIVE
app.directive('addEllipsis', function(){
return {
restrict : 'A',
scope : {
ngBind : '=' // Full-length original string
},
link : function(scope, element, attrs){
var newValue;
scope.$watch('ngBind', function () {
/*
* CODE REMOVED - Build shortened string and set to: newText
*/
element.html(newText); // - Does not work in Firefox and is probably not best practice
});
}
};
});
The line in question is that last one in the directive:
element.html(newText)
I'm assuming some template-style approach should be used? I'm unclear how to best approach the answer. Thanks for any help.
You could use a filter instead. Something like this:
FILTER
app.filter('addEllipsis', function () {
return function (input, scope) {
if (input) {
// Replace this with the real implementation
return input.substring(0, 5) + '...';
}
}
});
HTML
<p data-ng-bind="articleText | addEllipsis"></p>
If you replace data-ng-bind="articleText" with ng-model="articleText" it should work in both Chrome and Firefox. I don't know why, maybe it is a bug? But it is a quick fix.
If you are interested in the difference, you can take a look at this post. But the behavior being different in different browser is indeed a bit weird.

Resources