Hey all,
This is my understanding of html and browsers. On the server, html is
plain text. When the browser sends request to server to fetch a
document, if the file is not already in html format, perhaps instead
in an rb file, ruby or whatever the server-side language of choice
converts the file to html and sends it to the browser. But what if we
have a partial thats not included in the document that is fetched?
Does it remain on the server as plain text and, therefore, is not part
of dom tree and therefore cannot be manipulated by javascript? In
other words, if we try to modify a dom node via javascript that is in
a partial on the server not interpeted, then javascript compiler will
raise an exception of undefined object. Now one technique is to use
ajax, where a user clicks a link, javascript captures event, sends
request to the server via ajax, and ruby handles the request. Now if
the response is to send the object back to the browser, specifically
javascript in plain text, then our rails method would have something
like this: render :text => ret_object.to_json. Now what if that
returned object hash (that utlimately gets converted to json before we
send response back to client) included this: returned_object[:data]
[:view] = render_to_string :partial => ''/home/my_table''.
Note that
my_table is a partial in home directory. When we grab the response
via javascript, then we can stick it anywhere on the existing DOM
tree: $(''#my_table .my_content'').append(resp.data.view);. Now
that
data can be manipulated by javascript. Is this all correct?
1) My question is does that partial remain plain text on server until
it is explicitly loaded on the document that was fetched from server.
2) What exactly is the point of render_to_string? Why can''t we just
use "render"? Or do we need to use render_to_string in order to use
the jquery append method, for example, when appending it to the DOM?
thanks for response
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
John Merlino wrote in post #1022569:> Hey all, > > This is my understanding of html and browsers. On the server, html is > plain text. When the browser sends request to server to fetch a > document, if the file is not already in html format, perhaps instead > in an rb file, ruby or whatever the server-side language of choice > converts the file to html and sends it to the browser. >No. Suppose you had a .rb file like this: [1, 2, 3]. each do |num| puts num * 4 end How would rails convert that to html? Put <h1> tags around the output? <div> tags? Use an unordered list: <ul><li></li>...<ul>? Everything transmitted over http is plain text--it''s just that when a browser sees things like <h1> in the response, it is programmed to display the text with big, bold letters.> But what if we > have a partial thats not included in the document that is fetched? > Does it remain on the server as plain text and, therefore, is not part > of dom tree and therefore cannot be manipulated by javascript?If the partial doesn''t have anything to do with the document that the browser requested, then the browser doesn''t know the partial even exists. The browser can only see what is in the response. Likewise, js doesn''t know anything about the partial either.> In > other words, if we try to modify a dom node via javascript that is in > a partial on the server >Impossible. The dom is created by the browser from what''s in the response. If it isn''t in the response, it isn''t in the dom. Of course, you can change the current dom with js.> then javascript compiler will > raise an exception of undefined object. Now one technique is to use > ajax, where a user clicks a link, javascript captures event, sends > request to the server via ajax, and ruby handles the request. Now if > the response is to send the object back to the browser,Just to clarify, plain text is sent back in the response to the js request. js then interprets the plain text, much like a browser interprets an <h1> tag in the plain text it receives as a response.> specifically > javascript in plain text, then our rails method would have something > like this: render :text => ret_object.to_json. Now what if that > returned object hash (that utlimately gets converted to json before we > send response back to client) included this: returned_object[:data] > [:view] = render_to_string :partial => ''/home/my_table''. Note that > my_table is a partial in home directory.That is ruby code. js doesn''t understand ruby. On the other hand, if that ruby code executes on the server before the response is sent back, then something may get added to ret_object, and when ret_object is converted to json format, whatever was added by the ruby code will be in the json. ruby executes on the server, js executes in the browser. js does not execute ruby code.> When we grab the response > via javascript, then we can stick it anywhere on the existing DOM > tree: $(''#my_table .my_content'').append(resp.data.view);. Now that > data can be manipulated by javascript. Is this all correct? >Yes. Once js gets a response, the js can do anything it wants with the response. If the response text is in html format, js can search for one html element in the text and insert that in the dom, or js can insert the whole html fragment in the dom. If the text in the response is in json format, js can extract some data from the json, insert it in a div tag, and insert the div tag in the dom.> 1) My question is does that partial remain plain text on server until > it is explicitly loaded on the document that was fetched from server. >Everything contained in requests and responses is text, and every file on the server is text. Once the browser receives some text in html format, i.e. it has those funny looking tags everywhere, it creates the dom.> 2) What exactly is the point of render_to_string? Why can''t we just > use "render"? Or do we need to use render_to_string in order to use > the jquery append method, for example, when appending it to the DOM? >According to railsguide: ... render_to_string. This method takes exactly the same options as render, but it returns a string instead of sending a response back to the browser. So render_to_string does not send a response back to the browser, while render :text => ''<div>hello world</div>" does send a response back to the browser. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
this was incredible response, everything was explained so clearly. On Sep 18, 2:40 pm, 7stud -- <li...-fsXkhYbjdPsEEoCn2XhGlw@public.gmane.org> wrote:> John Merlino wrote in post #1022569: > > > Hey all, > > > This is my understanding of html and browsers. On the server, html is > > plain text. When the browser sends request to server to fetch a > > document, if the file is not already in html format, perhaps instead > > in an rb file, ruby or whatever the server-side language of choice > > converts the file to html and sends it to the browser. > > No. Suppose you had a .rb file like this: > > [1, 2, 3]. each do |num| > puts num * 4 > end > > How would rails convert that to html? Put <h1> tags around the output? > <div> tags? Use an unordered list: <ul><li></li>...<ul>? > > Everything transmitted over http is plain text--it''s just that when a > browser sees things like <h1> in the response, it is programmed to > display the text with big, bold letters. > > > But what if we > > have a partial thats not included in the document that is fetched? > > Does it remain on the server as plain text and, therefore, is not part > > of dom tree and therefore cannot be manipulated by javascript? > > If the partial doesn''t have anything to do with the document that the > browser requested, then the browser doesn''t know the partial even > exists. The browser can only see what is in the response. Likewise, js > doesn''t know anything about the partial either. > > > In > > other words, if we try to modify a dom node via javascript that is in > > a partial on the server > > Impossible. The dom is created by the browser from what''s in the > response. If it isn''t in the response, it isn''t in the dom. Of course, > you can change the current dom with js. > > > then javascript compiler will > > raise an exception of undefined object. Now one technique is to use > > ajax, where a user clicks a link, javascript captures event, sends > > request to the server via ajax, and ruby handles the request. Now if > > the response is to send the object back to the browser, > > Just to clarify, plain text is sent back in the response to the js > request. js then interprets the plain text, much like a browser > interprets an <h1> tag in the plain text it receives as a response. > > > specifically > > javascript in plain text, then our rails method would have something > > like this: render :text => ret_object.to_json. Now what if that > > returned object hash (that utlimately gets converted to json before we > > send response back to client) included this: returned_object[:data] > > [:view] = render_to_string :partial => ''/home/my_table''. Note that > > my_table is a partial in home directory. > > That is ruby code. js doesn''t understand ruby. On the other hand, if > that ruby code executes on the server before the response is sent back, > then something may get added to ret_object, and when ret_object is > converted to json format, whatever was added by the ruby code will be in > the json. > > ruby executes on the server, js executes in the browser. js does not > execute ruby code. > > > When we grab the response > > via javascript, then we can stick it anywhere on the existing DOM > > tree: $(''#my_table .my_content'').append(resp.data.view);. Now that > > data can be manipulated by javascript. Is this all correct? > > Yes. Once js gets a response, the js can do anything it wants with the > response. If the response text is in html format, js can search for > one html element in the text and insert that in the dom, or js can > insert the whole html fragment in the dom. > > If the text in the response is in json format, js can extract some data > from the json, insert it in a div tag, and insert the div tag in the > dom. > > > 1) My question is does that partial remain plain text on server until > > it is explicitly loaded on the document that was fetched from server. > > Everything contained in requests and responses is text, and every file > on the server is text. Once the browser receives some text in html > format, i.e. it has those funny looking tags everywhere, it creates the > dom. > > > 2) What exactly is the point of render_to_string? Why can''t we just > > use "render"? Or do we need to use render_to_string in order to use > > the jquery append method, for example, when appending it to the DOM? > > According to railsguide: > > ... render_to_string. This method takes exactly the same options as > render, but it returns a string instead of sending a response back to > the browser. > > So render_to_string does not send a response back to the browser, while > render :text => ''<div>hello world</div>" does send a response back to > the browser. > > -- > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
On Sep 18, 7:40 pm, 7stud -- <li...-fsXkhYbjdPsEEoCn2XhGlw@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > 2) What exactly is the point of render_to_string? Why can''t we just > > use "render"? Or do we need to use render_to_string in order to use > > the jquery append method, for example, when appending it to the DOM? > > According to railsguide: > > ... render_to_string. This method takes exactly the same options as > render, but it returns a string instead of sending a response back to > the browser. > > So render_to_string does not send a response back to the browser, while > render :text => ''<div>hello world</div>" does send a response back to > the browser. >One addition to this: it depends if you are writing code in your controller on in a view. In a view, render just returns a string and you don''t need render_to_string (I don''t think it even exists). In a controller render sets the response body (and calling it a second time raises a doublerendererror), so if you need to manipulate the rendered content in anyway (e.g. stick it in a json document) then you need to use render_to_string Fred> -- > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
thanks for response On Sep 19, 4:26 am, Frederick Cheung <frederick.che...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> On Sep 18, 7:40 pm, 7stud -- <li...-fsXkhYbjdPsEEoCn2XhGlw@public.gmane.org> wrote: > > > > 2) What exactly is the point of render_to_string? Why can''t we just > > > use "render"? Or do we need to use render_to_string in order to use > > > the jquery append method, for example, when appending it to the DOM? > > > According to railsguide: > > > ... render_to_string. This method takes exactly the same options as > > render, but it returns a string instead of sending a response back to > > the browser. > > > So render_to_string does not send a response back to the browser, while > > render :text => ''<div>hello world</div>" does send a response back to > > the browser. > > One addition to this: it depends if you are writing code in your > controller on in a view. In a view, render just returns a string and > you don''t need render_to_string (I don''t think it even exists). In a > controller render sets the response body (and calling it a second time > raises a doublerendererror), so if you need to manipulate the rendered > content in anyway (e.g. stick it in a json document) then you need to > use render_to_string > > Fred > > > > > > > > > -- > > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.