On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 02:32:21AM +0100, Joerg Heinicke wrote: > <wb:repeater id="myRepeaterId" parent-path="." row-path="TheRowPath"> > <wb:unique-row> > <wb:value id="myId1" path="myId1"/> > <wb:value id="myId2" path="myId2"/> > </wb:unique-row> > <wb:on-bind> > <wb:value id="field1" path="field1"/> > <wb:value id="field2" path="field2"/> > </wb:on-bind> > </wb:repeater> > > or > > <wb:repeater id="myRepeaterId" parent-path="." row-path="TheRowPath"> > <wb:on-bind> > <wb:value id="myId1" path="myId1" unique="true"/> > <wb:value id="myId2" path="myId2" unique="true"/> > <wb:value id="field1" path="field1"/> > <wb:value id="field2" path="field2"/> > </wb:on-bind> > </wb:repeater> > > What do the other people think?
I do not like this option, because it implies that the two wb:value's are individually unique. The first example above (with wb:unique-row) gives the right implication, that the values when combined identify a unique row. I have mixed feelings about using wb:unique-row, wb:key, or wb:unique-key, but I might be leaning toward wb:key. --Tim Larson
