Menu
Mozilla says Web components consist of three main technologies:
Is number 3, "HTML templates", even necessary in light of ECMAscript's Template Literals?
Look at this example I got from James Milner:
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta charset="UTF-8">
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
<title>Web Component</title>
<script type="text/javascript">
// We define an ES6 class that extends HTMLElement
class CounterElement extends HTMLElement{
constructor() {
super();
// Initialise the counter value
this.counter = 0;
// We attach an open shadow root to the custom element
const shadowRoot= this.attachShadow({mode: 'open'});
// We define some inline styles using a template string
const styles=`
:host {
position: relative;
font-family: sans-serif;
}
#counter-increment, #counter-decrement {
width: 60px;
height: 30px;
margin: 20px;
background: none;
border: 1px solid black;
}
#counter-value {
font-weight: bold;
}
`;
// We provide the shadow root with some HTML
shadowRoot.innerHTML = `
<style>${styles}</style>
<h3>Counter</h3>
<slot name='counter-content'>Button</slot>
<button id='counter-increment'> - </button>
<span id='counter-value'> 0 </span>
<button id='counter-decrement'> + </button>
`;
// We can query the shadow root for internal elements
// in this case the button
this.incrementButton = this.shadowRoot.querySelector('#counter-increment');
this.decrementButton = this.shadowRoot.querySelector('#counter-decrement');
this.counterValue = this.shadowRoot.querySelector('#counter-value');
// We can bind an event which references one of the class methods
this.incrementButton.addEventListener("click", this.decrement.bind(this));
this.decrementButton.addEventListener("click", this.increment.bind(this));
}
increment() {
this.counter++
this.invalidate();
}
decrement() {
this.counter--
this.invalidate();
}
// Call when the counter changes value
invalidate() {
this.counterValue.innerHTML = this.counter;
}
}
// This is where the actual element is defined for use in the DOM
customElements.define('counter-element', CounterElement);
</script>
</head>
<body>
<counter-element></counter-element>
</body>
</html>
Notice how he doesn't use an HTML template, but instead uses an ecmascript template literal to set the innerHTML of the shadowRoot.
After this, he uses querySelector to get internal elements of the shadowRoot and he ultimately adds event listeners to the increment and decrement buttons.
If you were to use a HTML template, instead of an ecmascript template literal, what does this gain you?
Conceptually, I'm struggling to find a situation where I'd prefer an HTML Template Element over an Ecmascript Template Literal.
Please advise.
585
Template literals are great for HTML because you can add newlines and very cleanly have dynamic classes and other attributes.
Template literals are literals delimited with backtick ( ` ) characters, allowing for multi-line strings, string interpolation with embedded expressions, and special constructs called tagged templates.
The <template> HTML element is a mechanism for holding HTML that is not to be rendered immediately when a page is loaded but may be instantiated subsequently during runtime using JavaScript. Think of a template as a content fragment that is being stored for subsequent use in the document.
Template literals provide an easy way to interpolate variables and expressions into strings. The method is called string interpolation.
The template tag is not 'required' for Web Components per se. It probably made more sense when HTML Imports were being pushed, allowing for importing and reusing HTML snippets, but that has since ceased. Here you could have imported a template and reused that.
It's important to note the specifications are designed to be standalone and can be used interdependently of each other also, which makes them versatile. The HTML tag has use cases outside of the realm of Web Components; it's useful because it allows you to define a piece of markup that doesn't render until instantiated via JavaScript later on. Indeed you can use templates without using any of the other specifications (Custom Elements, Shadow DOM etc).
The template tag can certainly be used in conjunction with the other specs. For example, we could have used it in the example shown to arguably make the code less imperative and more markup focused like so:
<template id="counterTemplate">
<style>
:host {
position: relative;
font-family: sans-serif;
}
#counter-increment, #counter-decrement {
width: 60px;
height: 30px;
margin: 20px;
background: none;
border: 1px solid black;
}
#counter-value {
font-weight: bold;
}
</style>
<h3>Counter</h3>
<slot name='counter-content'>Button</slot>
<button id='counter-increment'> - </button>
<span id='counter-value'> 0 </span>
<button id='counter-decrement'> + </button>
</template>
And then use this later in JavaScript like so:
const template = document.querySelector('#counterTemplate');
const counter = document.cloneNode(template);
shadowRoot.appendChild(counter);
The downside here is that it would require that the template existed in the DOM prior to the instantiation as it is relying on the #counterTemplate template being there. In some ways this makes the Custom Element less portable, hence why template literal might be more desirable. I haven't tested the performance of both, but my gut tells me that the template would possibly be more performant.
Disclaimer: I wrote the original blog post
89
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
