I replaced PageJS routing in our application with app-location and app-route, and everything seems to be working except the query parameters. I noticed it can only read URLs like host?param1=val1#/view, not host#view?param1=val1 how PageJS used to.
Upon further digging, I discovered that this is actually an RFC standard. I find it odd that PageJS and Angular can use the nonstandard query string format.
Is there a way to use the query-params attribute of app-route to read the nonstandard query parameters for backward compatibility?
The non-standard form works in PageJS because PageJS manually parses the query string from the URL by extracting the text that follows ? and then parsing that for any hashes that need to be separated out. Angular might do something similar. On the other hand, <app-location> (and <iron-location>) uses the platform's window.location.search to fetch the query parameters.
If you need to stick with <iron-location>, you could add backward compatible support by monkey-patching <iron-location>._urlChanged(), which is responsible for parsing the URLs for <app-location>.
Monkey-patched <app-location>:
Polymer({
is: 'my-app',
ready: function() {
this._setupAppLocation();
},
_setupAppLocation: function() {
// assumes <app-location id="location">
const ironLocation = this.$.location.$$('iron-location');
if (!ironLocation) return;
ironLocation._urlChanged = function() {
this._dontUpdateUrl = true;
this.path = window.decodeURIComponent(window.location.pathname);
if (window.location.hash.includes('?')) {
const parts = window.location.hash.split('?');
this.hash = window.decodeURIComponent(parts[0].slice(1));
this.query = parts[1];
// Prepend other query parameters found in standard location
if (window.location.search) {
this.query = window.location.search.substring(1) + '&' + this.query;
}
} else {
this.query = window.location.search.substring(1);
}
this._dontUpdateUrl = false;
this._updateUrl();
};
}
});
Alternatively, you could switch to a Polymer element that supports parsing query parameters in either form out of the box. I recommend <nebula-location> (which uses QS as its query string parser).
Example usage of <nebula-location>:
<nebula-location data="{{locationData}}"></nebula-location>
<div>foo=[[locationData.queryParams.foo]]</div>
#view?foo=123
?foo=123#view
Related
I am trying to pass a simple variable value into an HTML file using ember.js. My value is contained within a json file called value.json.
My HTML code is as follows:
<h1>I won {{App.moneyvalue}} today!</h1>
However when I pass the json call via ember, it think that the entire call is a variable:
App = Ember.Application.create({
moneyvalue: function () {
return $.getJSON( "js/value.json", function( data ) {
return data.tot;
});
}
}
And returns the following:
I won function () { return $.getJSON( "js/donors.json", function( data ) { return data.tot; }); } today!
As it seems to think that moneyvalue is a string variable as opposed to a value?
The jSON file is superbasic
{
"tot": 100
}
Where is this going wrong?
you're supplying Handlebars with a function, generally you would use a computed or normal property on the object. In this case you really just shouldn't define it in the application scope either, I'd recommend using an application route (it's the root route of your app).
App.ApplicationRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
model: function(){
return $.getJSON( "js/value.json");
}
});
Then in your handlebars just use
<h1>I won {{tot}} today!</h1>
Here's an example: http://emberjs.jsbin.com/OxIDiVU/576/edit
I have done a service that gets a json file from the server with the translated values of the labels of my webapp. Seems to work fine:
mobilityApp.service('serveiTraduccions', function($resource) {
this.getTranslation = function($scope) {
var languageFilePath = 'traduccions/traduccio_en.json';
$resource(languageFilePath).get(function (data) {
$scope.translation = data;
});
};
});
What I am trying to do is acces that "$scope.translation" from my controler, I tried all and nothing worked. The object is saved in my $scope as you can see:
how can I get the values of the "registroBtnRegistro", "registroErrorRegistro" etc ?
Thanks in advance !
I tried:
console.log($scope.translation); -> undefined
console.log($scope['translation']); -> undefined
console.log($scope.translation.registroBtnRegistro); -> TypeError:
Cannot read property 'registroBtnRegistro' of undefined
console.log($scope.translation['registroBtnRegistro']); -> TypeError:
Cannot read property 'registroBtnRegistro' of undefined
Maybe you're trying to access these values from another $scope that not inherits the scope where you've created your translation model.
Try to assign this model directly to $rootScope, so you can access it from every scope:
mobilityApp.service('serveiTraduccions', function($resource, $rootScope) {
this.getTranslation = function() {
var languageFilePath = 'traduccions/traduccio_en.json';
$resource(languageFilePath).get(function (data) {
$rootScope.translation = data;
});
};
});
this answer is a blind attempt because your original post lacks basic information like the call from the controller.
we can refine it until we make it work.
First, you should be returning something from your method:
mobilityApp.service('serveiTraduccions', function($resource) {
this.getTranslation = function() {
var languageFilePath = 'traduccions/traduccio_en.json';
return $resource(languageFilePath);
};
});
You are using $resource but you might as well use basic $http.get(). at least it doesn't look like a restful api to me.
In any case, because it's an asynchronous request, it will not return the list of translated strings, but a resource "class" that allows methods like get, delete or the more general query():
from the docs: default methods are
{ 'get': {method:'GET'},
'save': {method:'POST'},
'query': {method:'GET', isArray:true},
'remove': {method:'DELETE'},
'delete': {method:'DELETE'} };
sidenote: injecting $scope in a service doesn't make much sense to me: services are used to encapsulate common logic accross components. However, you can pass a scope instance as a parameter.
Then, the controller that uses this should have the service injected and use a callback to get the results when they have arrived (asynchronous operation!):
TraduccioCtrl ... {
$scope.translation = {}; // avoid undefined when the view just loads
ServeiTraduccions.getTranslation.query(function (response) {
$scope.translation = response; // and angular's two-way data binding will probably do the rest
});
}
The Angular docs about ng-resource have a working example. Other questions in SO have addressed this already too, like Using AngularJS $resource to get data
I have a rest service for which I am sending the Json data as ["1","2","3"](list of strings) which is working fine in firefox rest client plugin, but while sending the data in application the structure is {"0":"1","1":"2","2":"3"} format, and I am not able to pass the data, how to convert the {"0":"1","1":"2","2":"3"} to ["1","2","3"] so that I can send the data through application, any help would be greatly appreciated.
If the format of the json is { "index" : "value" }, is what I'm seeing in {"0":"1","1":"2","2":"3"}, then we can take advantage of that information and you can do this:
var myObj = {"0":"1","1":"2","2":"3"};
var convertToList = function(object) {
var i = 0;
var list = [];
while(object.hasOwnProperty(i)) { // check if value exists for index i
list.push(object[i]); // add value into list
i++; // increment index
}
return list;
};
var result = convertToList(myObj); // result: ["1", "2", "3"]
See fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/amyamy86/NzudC/
Use a fake index to "iterate" through the list. Keep in mind that this won't work if there is a break in the indices, can't be this: {"0":"1","2":"3"}
You need to parse out the json back into a javascript object. There are parsing tools in the later iterations of dojo as one of the other contributors already pointed out, however most browsers support JSON.parse(), which is defined in ECMA-262 5th Edition (the specification that JS is based on). Its usage is:
var str = your_incoming_json_string,
// here is the line ...
obj = JSON.parse(string);
// DEBUG: pump it out to console to see what it looks like
a.forEach(function(entry) {
console.log(entry);
});
For the browsers that don't support JSON.parse() you can implement it using json2.js, but since you are actually using dojo, then dojo.fromJson() is your way to go. Dojo takes care of browser independence for you.
var str = your_incoming_json_string,
// here is the line ...
obj = dojo.fromJson(str);
// DEBUG: pump it out to console to see what it looks like
a.forEach(function(entry) {
console.log(entry);
});
If you're using an AMD version of Dojo then you will need to go back to the Dojo documentation and look at dojo/_base/json examples on the dojo.fromJson page.
I'm populating a YUI DataTable via JSON, starting from the sample code DataTable + DataSource.Get + JSON Data. Despite its promising title, this sample uses JSONP, not straight JSON. In my case, I'm querying with a relative URL, so I don't need (or want) JSONP.
My code defines a data source and schema like this:
var dataSource = new Y.DataSource.Get({ source: "myLocalUrl.json" });
dataSource.plug(Y.Plugin.DataSourceJSONSchema, {
schema: { resultListLocator: "result.path.to.array", resultFields: ["key1", "key2"]}
});
Nowhere in here does it specify JSONP, but apparently that's the default behavior-- despite the security warnings in the JSONP documentation. Perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but I've checked the API docs for Y.DataSource and Y.DataSource.Get, and neither is particularly enlightening.
I had better luck with DataSource.IO
var dataSource = new Y.DataSource.IO({ source: "myLocalUrl.json" });
dataSource.plug(Y.Plugin.DataSourceJSONSchema, {
schema: { resultListLocator: "result.path.to.array", resultFields: ["key1", "key2"]}
});
I would like to know if any better way to create multiple collections fetching from a single big JSON file. I got a JSON file looks like this.
{
"Languages": [...],
"ProductTypes": [...],
"Menus": [...],
"Submenus": [...],
"SampleOne": [...],
"SampleTwo": [...],
"SampleMore": [...]
}
I am using the url/fetch to create each collection for each node of the JSON above.
var source = 'data/sample.json';
Languages.url = source;
Languages.fetch();
ProductTypes.url = source;
ProductTypes.fetch();
Menus.url = source;
Menus.fetch();
Submenus.url = source;
Submenus.fetch();
SampleOne.url = source;
SampleOne.fetch();
SampleTwo.url = source;
SampleTwo.fetch();
SampleMore.url = source;
SampleMore.fetch();
Any better solution for this?
Backbone is great for when your application fits the mold it provides. But don't be afraid to go around it when it makes sense for your application. It's a very small library. Making repetitive and duplicate GET requests just to fit backbone's mold is probably prohibitively inefficient. Check out jQuery.getJSON or your favorite basic AJAX library, paired with some basic metaprogramming as following:
//Put your real collection constructors here. Just examples.
var collections = {
Languages: Backbone.Collection.extend(),
ProductTypes: Backbone.Collection.extend(),
Menus: Backbone.Collection.extend()
};
function fetch() {
$.getJSON("/url/to/your/big.json", {
success: function (response) {
for (var name in collections) {
//Grab the list of raw json objects by name out of the response
//pass it to your collection's constructor
//and store a reference to your now-populated collection instance
//in your collection lookup object
collections[name] = new collections[name](response[name]);
}
}
});
}
fetch();
Once you've called fetch() and the asyn callback has completed, you can do things like collections.Menus.at(0) to get at the loaded model instances.
Your current approach, in addition to being pretty long, risks retrieving the large file multiple times (browser caching won't always work here, especially if the first request hasn't completed by the time you make the next one).
I think the easiest option here is to go with straight jQuery, rather than Backbone, then use .reset() on your collections:
$.get('data/sample.json', function(data) {
Languages.reset(data['Languages']);
ProductTypes.reset(data['ProductTypes']);
// etc
});
If you wanted to cut down on the redundant code, you can put your collections into a namespace like app and then do something like this (though it might be a bit too clever to be legible):
app.Languages = new LanguageCollection();
// etc
$.get('data/sample.json', function(data) {
_(['Languages', 'ProductTypes', ... ]).each(function(collection) {
app[collection].reset(data[collection]);
})
});
I think you can solve your need and still stay into the Backbone paradigm, I think an elegant solution that fits to me is create a Model that fetch the big JSON and uses it to fetch all the Collections in its change event:
var App = Backbone.Model.extend({
url: "http://myserver.com/data/sample.json",
initialize: function( opts ){
this.languages = new Languages();
this.productTypes = new ProductTypes();
// ...
this.on( "change", this.fetchCollections, this );
},
fetchCollections: function(){
this.languages.reset( this.get( "Languages" ) );
this.productTypes.reset( this.get( "ProductTypes" ) );
// ...
}
});
var myApp = new App();
myApp.fetch();
You have access to all your collections through:
myApp.languages
myApp.productTypes
...
You can easily do this with a parse method. Set up a model and create an attribute for each collection. There's nothing saying your model attribute has to be a single piece of data and can't be a collection.
When you run your fetch it will return back the entire response to a parse method that you can override by creating a parse function in your model. Something like:
parse: function(response) {
var myResponse = {};
_.each(response.data, function(value, key) {
myResponse[key] = new Backbone.Collection(value);
}
return myResponse;
}
You could also create new collections at a global level or into some other namespace if you'd rather not have them contained in a model, but that's up to you.
To get them from the model later you'd just have to do something like:
model.get('Languages');
backbone-relational provides a solution within backbone (without using jQuery.getJSON) which might make sense if you're already using it. Short answer at https://stackoverflow.com/a/11095675/70987 which I'd be happy to elaborate on if needed.