I'm volunteering some time to work on an open-data project, which I've started a repo out here for:


The general idea is you'll paste in script tags the same way Google maps does to any third-party site to call the JavaScript.

I'm trying to prevent global namespace abuses (both-ways), and make configuration very simple and straight-forward.

Right now, the plugin configuration looks like (this is before my re-write):

<script type="text/javascript">
    var Config = { height: 500, width: 500 };
    document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='http://example.com/somecode.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E"));

I've got a few problems with this, first of all, it's using document.write and hopes that script-tags execute in the way I want them to. I'm scared this will break the page, I'd rather use DOM append child methods.

The other problem here is you can't configure this in-site simply without introducing a global variable.

I'd like to do something where I can call such as:

<script type="text/javascript">
    /*document.createelement script tag... make the
    src equal to the javascript, pass config data by function parameter?*/);

So my code is mostly a huge closure, and I try to contain the whole thing inside of there.

    /*things happen*/
    "conf": "data", 

In the code I've linked up above I've made a function confMerge that attempts to do a recursive deep exclusive replace on the defaults being over-ridden by the configure data. I'm somewhat concerned it's over-kill in a few areas, and may break in others. My other concern is that I can't alter behavior based on type (for instance, google maps API can take a string as a center parameter, but I provide two numbers, my configure style can't deal with that.)

I've got a few rules, and that's that this needs to be ie6 friendly, I can't play with the prototype to shim ES5 styles, and I can't blow up someone elses website with my plugin, and it needs to be able to work without letting an average website with globals all-over-the-place blow up my widget.



1 Answer 1


There's nothing stopping you putting a closure in around the script part so you don't have global variables - all except closures cause memory leaks in IE6 - in fact, Google Analytic does it.

The switch statement does look a bit over-kill in confMerge. I'm not sure typeof will return 'xml'. Most often, all you have to do is options[i] = conf[i] || defaults[i];, basically. With objects and arrays you just recurse down. I've done this numerous times, so as far as I can see, nothing to worry about.

I don't see why you cannot support strings. You can always build a validator for that specific property.

Update: I think I realise my mistake. I assumed that copyMerge did a shallow copy. The way you do it, you enforce the structure of the defaults. I still believe, however, that validation is best solution, but what you should do is a shallow copy, so when you see an object or array you just reference it, rather than calling copyMerge.

Then to validate the data, I feel that creating validation functions for all the properties is the best way. Thus you can handle the property center and make sure if it's a string, or an object with the two properties 1 and 0. If it must be an array you can it by using Object.prototype.toString.apply( obj ) === "[object Array]".

You can put the validation functions in copyMerge by creating an object funcs with the same name as the properties, so object["center"] or in copyMerge, object[ i ] where i === "center". Another way is to have a copyMerge go the copying and have a validator function to validate the data.

  • \$\begingroup\$ The XML is there because that's a possibility in the spec, so I figure'd I account for it somehow. I'm sure I could support strings, my issue is what's an elegant way to actually do that? If my defaults are an array, and I get a string, I don't want to code a one-off setting, I want to design a solution for other things. \$\endgroup\$
    – Incognito
    Commented Sep 11, 2011 at 23:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ I have added more information. A question that cropped up for me is, why do you do a deep copy? \$\endgroup\$
    – NebulaFox
    Commented Sep 12, 2011 at 10:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.