Browsers don't seem to parse <script> element content that's added to the document via targetElement.innerHTML. That's probably what you're running into.
The best solution is to use a well-tested framework like jQuery for solving problems like this. They've already figured out how to safely and correctly inject scripts into the DOM. There's no sense re-inventing the wheel unless you absolutely can't spare the bandwidth for the library.
One way you might fix this is by separating the JavaScript from the HTML in the Ajax response, either by issuing two requests (probably slower) or by structuring your JavaScript and HTML within a JSON object (probably harder to maintain).
Here's an example:
<script>
function load_content(){
var req = new XMLHttpRequest();
req.open("GET", "ajax.json", true);
req.onreadystatechange = function (e){
if (req.readyState === 4){
if (req.status === 200){
// these three lines inject your JavaScript and
// HTML content into the DOM
var json = JSON.parse(req.responseText);
document.getElementById("target").innerHTML = json.html;
eval(json.js);
} else {
console.log("Error", req.statusText);
}
}
};
req.send(null);
}
</script>
<a href="#" onclick="load_content()">Load more stuff</a>
<div id="target"></div>
The document ajax.json on the server looks like this:
{
"js": "window.bar = function (){ console.log(\"bar\"); return false; }",
"html": "<p><a href=\"#\" onclick=\"bar();\">Log a message</a></p>"
}
If you choose this route, you must either:
- namespace your functions:
MyApp.foo = function (){ ... };, or
- explicitly add your functions to the global namespace:
window.foo = function (){ ... };.
This is because eval executes in the current scope, so your function definitions inherit that scope and won't be globally available. In my example, I chose the latter option since it's just a trivial example, but you should be aware of why this is necessary.
Please make sure to read When is JavaScript's eval() not evil? if you decide to implement this yourself.
