A combo bar/restaurant sounds reasonable as a primary category (in order to
capture the fields applicable to both). Of course this particular
calisthentic is necessary because the SF model does not accommodate multiple
forms, aka multiple types aka multiple categories. And, I hasten to add,
that that's not a big surprise in itself -- pretty much all form managers
are designed with only one form associated with each object.

The objective of this "Has Primary Category" proposal is merely to permit
control of which particular (single) form is indirectly associated with a
page. It is to make visible the currently opaque process of form selection
for a page. I think it would help end-users and developers who NORMALLY, I
would say, assign multiple categories to a page.

Permitting multiple forms for a page is surely something that can be worked
another day. For now, it seems a small step that developers and users have
explicit control over which (single) form is associated with a page. Even in
a multiple-form scenario, specifying the primary category, ie the primary
form, I'd think would still be useful/relevant.

Thanks -

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]on Behalf Of Yaron Koren
Sent: Sunday, March 22, 2009 6:49 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Semantic Forms] Re: Form Selection (Multiple Inheritance)


  Well, I'm glad you brought out a concrete example, because I can use it to
hopefully illustrate the misgivings I have about multiple categories in a
page. You have a page, "Ristorante Muro vino e cucina", for a place that's
both a bar and a restaurant (certainly a common combination). Here's that
page being edited with both the form for bars and the one for restaurants:


http://www.venicewiki.org/wiki/Speciale:EditData/Bar/Ristorante_Muro_vino_e_
cucina

http://www.venicewiki.org/wiki/Speciale:EditData/Ristorante/Ristorante_Muro_
vino_e_cucina

  Some of the fields are shared by both forms, like location and telephone
number. But the form for bars has fields for the price of coffee, wine,
etc., while the restaurant form doesn't; and the form for the restaurant has
an "average dinner price" field, while the bar form doesn't. But for a place
that's both a bar and a restaurant, wouldn't you want all of those fields?
Using one form or the other leads to less than the ideal amount of
information.

  There are a few options I could suggest instead: one is to make a third
category/form combination, for "Bar restaurants"; and make that category a
sub-category of both "Bars" and "Restaurants". Another possibility is to
have either the "bar" or "restaurant" forms (or both) contain the fields
necessary for the other one, that users could optionally fill in; then have
an #if call within each template, so that if the user fills out one or more
of those optional fields, the page gets added to the category "Bar
restaurants", which, as before, is a sub-category of the other two. A third
possibility is to have a single form and category for both bars and
resturants, with just a set of checkboxes for users to specify what kind of
place it is.

  -Yaron



  On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Venicewiki.org <[email protected]>
wrote:


    We also like to have a "Has primary category" property.

    Our problem: in our site a restaurant page is inserted through
    Template:Restaurants in the Category:Restaurants. But if
    [[Category:Bars]] is added in the "other categories" field, then the
    Form:Bar is selected when editing the page with form instead of the
    original Form:Restaurant (because "B"<"R").

    Example: http://www.venicewiki.org/wiki/Ristorante_Muro_vino_e_cucina






  

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to