Nobody asked for it. It will still be stores as string so I am not sure what you gain by it that cannot be achieved by a list:string and a IS_LIST_OF(IS_FLOAT_IN_RANGE(...)) validator.
On Saturday, 29 September 2012 20:36:36 UTC-5, VP wrote: > > I'm wondering why we can't have list:double as a field type? It seems a > natural thing to have. > > Thanks. > --
