Move template to external file

[snapjay]

Moved template to an external file to separate HTML from the JS
e.g. I don't have the Glythicon installed so I need to use my own template
Used the Bootstrap UI folder naming convention.

[sebastianha]

I also thought about externalizing the template but as far as I know this is a problem when minimizing / uglifying the code as the tools don't recognize the template and therefore do not include it. Or am I missing something?

One solution would be to include two versions, one with inline-template and one without. But then there has to be made a choice which version should be referenced as the main version in bower.json.

[sebastianha]

For one project I created a script doing this automatically ( https://gist.github.com/sebastianha/613e37aedfd99a1e9fa2 ) and I hooked it into pre-commit of git.

This could be a solution but then the bower.json decision is still open.

[jrgleason]

As far as I know minification is ok if you use html2js like the angular-ui
project. Check out my fork I can create a pull this weekend if you can't
figure it out.
On Oct 29, 2014 4:00 AM, "Sebastian Hammerl" notifications@github.com
wrote:

I also thought about externalizing the template but as far as I know this
is a problem when minimizing / uglifying the code as the tools don't
recognize the template and therefore do not include it. Or am I missing
something?

One solution would be to include two versions, one with inline-template
and one without. But then there has to be made a choice which version
should be referenced as the main version in bower.json.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#8 (comment)
.

[sebastianha]

Thanks for the hint to html2js, this seems to be exactly what I was looking for! I will take a look at it.

[jrgleason]

Also allows you to use jade which I personally prefer :-)
On Oct 29, 2014 8:16 AM, "Sebastian Hammerl" notifications@github.com
wrote:

Thanks for the hint to html2js, this seems to be exactly what I was
looking for! I will take a look at it.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#8 (comment)
.

[snapjay]

Yeah - The minification is more a function of grunt/gulp compiling process.
It would be better to abstract the HTML from the JS.

I'd also say the same argument goes for abstracting the CSS you're including for the size attribute. Would be better for handle that thru the CSS not the JS
e.g. <checkbox class="large" />

[jrgleason]

Yeah I agree that making the large etc attr is bad but prob another issue
:-)
On Oct 29, 2014 9:22 AM, "Dan Shreim" notifications@github.com wrote:

Yeah - The minification is more a function of grunt/gulp compiling process.
It would be better to abstract the HTML from the JS.

I'd also say the same argument goes for abstracting the CSS you're
including for the size attribute. Would be better for handle that thru the
CSS not the JS
e.g.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#8 (comment)
.