Oh - by "for-template" fields, do you mean fields contained in multiple-instance templates, the ones that use "remove" and "add another"? Or are you talking about all templates?
The second issue I didn't understand either - what's an argument formulated from a value? -Yaron On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 3:15 AM, John McClure <[email protected]>wrote: > > Your're right. And maybe stub template transclusion={{template}} with > no args is pretty obfuscating. Anyway, the system generates these if a > user does not 'remove' an otherwise empty for-template set of fields > displayed by 'add amother'. If the template is at all intelligent, it > does nothing when insufficient args are supplied. The result is a > meaningless call in the source, confusing users braving the winds of > wiki, and of course routinely wasteful processing. > > So I suggest a switch is needed to prevent the generation of the call > in the event that no args are provided. > > The second area concerns whether an argument, formulated from the > value, should be formulated and passed to the for-template when no > change to the value has occurred. Use cases include fields with > default instructions and fields with a standard prefix (eg namespace) > pre-specified. > > These two are related, and I jumbled it up before. The switch > described above would ignore not only empty fields but also fields > with unmodified default content. > > Thanks. > > On Mar 11, 4:44 pm, Yaron Koren <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sorry, I don't understand - are you talking about handling empty fields > on a > > field-by-field basis, or having special handling if the user doesn't fill > > out anything? And what's a stub template transclusion? > > > > Also, if an empty value would require special handling, you could always > > make the field mandatory. > > > > -Yaron > > > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 5:10 PM, John McClure <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > If no information has been provided for fields that are for-template, > > > then it seems reasonable that the form author should be able to choose > > > whether SF generates a stub template transclusion or not. It can be > > > difficult for a template to determine whether conditions exist to > > > apply a category or not, so I think it may be better to have that > > > decision made in the form itself. > > > > > In a similar vein, it would be handy to specify that the default value > > > for a field is to be ignored in the event that no other fields for a > > > template have been provided. In other words, it may be useful to > > > discuss a few use cases involving the default attribute.- Hide quoted > text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Semantic Forms" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/semantic-forms?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
