On Jun 22, 2005, at 2:17 AM, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Mark Lundquist wrote:
On Jun 20, 2005, at 11:42 PM, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
[8<----snip!----]
And even more, repeater actions could have constraints on the
selection size, such as single-selection, multiple-selection,
leading these actions to be disabled if their associated
constraint isn't met.
...or a validation error. Like the classic "you must choose at least
one" constraint.
Not sure this is a validation error. In the case of actions this
should be more a transient message (e.g. a popup).
D'oh, my bad... I missed that you are talking about repeater _actions_.
Gotta read slower...
Anyway, that is a good idea. And be that as it may... I would also
like automatic validation for the "must choose at least one" scenario,
because I've had to code it by hand — gee, probably _twice_ now! :-).
In my book, that calls for automation! :-) Anyway, if selectedness
were made intrinsic as you propose, then that would enable this
validation.
Actually, I guess as "at least one" is the range [1..], we should
support the more general 'range' validation criterion here. Maybe we
can generalize <fd:value-count> for this?
That isn't persisted across successive posts of a form. Now we may
consider that actions have a special way of handling validation errors
by clearing them at each readFromRequest() which is different from
other widget types.
And finally, we may be able to specify on repeater bindings if
they have to act on the whole repeater on just on the selection.
Not sure what you mean, can you give an example?
The idea is to specify in the binding if it should operate on the full
repeater or only on the selected rows. Something like:
<fb:repeater use-selection="true">
Right :-) But it does sound like it could lead to usability issues
(error-prone form designs). I'm having trouble thinking of where
use-selection="true" in a binding would be actually useful...?
best regards,
—ml—
