Re: [TW] Re: a new widget
alexbod...@gmail.com
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 13:51, Diez B. Roggisch<de...@web.de> wrote:
>
> On Thursday 02 July 2009 14:52:29 alexbod...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 17:06, Diez B. Roggisch<de...@web.de> wrote:
>> > alexbod...@gmail.com schrieb:
>> >> hello friends,
>> >>
>> >> i have made a set of widgets that render as plain text.
>> >>
>> >> their intended usage is in forms, where you have data from some data
>> >> source, but you only want to show it, with no user input option.
>> >>
>> >> please enjoy.
>> >>
>> >> it's called tw.output.
>> >>
>> >> http://www.resheteva.org.il/packages
>> >
>> > Do they buffer the passed values as hidden input-fields? That would be
>> > interesting then, because it could be used to have "confirm"-screens
>> > that still pass the form-data without residing to session-based data.
>> >
>> > Diez
>>
>> what would you think about making all disabled textareas?
>> it would avoid data duplication for the text and it's hidden field, and
>> would allow direct markup.
>
> I'm not sure what exactly you mean - but I'd say that textareas are far less
> stylable than "normal" html-text - and frankly, the data-duplication can be
> safely ignored IMHO. We are talking user-entered content here - to how many
> kilobytes can that sum up?
>
that's the thing. the data is not user enterable (not here at least). i'm rather talking about a form with a few fields readonly in the fashion of totally "untouchable" text.
> Diez
>
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ToscaWidgets-discuss" group.
> To post to this group, send email to toscawidge...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to toscawidgets-dis...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/toscawidgets-discuss?hl=en
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>
>
--
alex
Diez B. Roggisch
I'm still not getting your idea. Of course I'm aware that we talk about
rendering form-data without making it editable - for confirmation
purposes for example.
However, you seemed to be concerned that using hidden input-fields to
transport the data, while showing some nicely rendered form of it would
be wasteful ("avoid data duplication"), and that I wanted to assure you
is not really an issue, as we are talking about a few kilobytes max.
HTH,
Diez
Diez B. Roggisch
> However, you seemed to be concerned that using hidden input-fields to
> transport the data, while showing some nicely rendered form of it would
> be wasteful ("avoid data duplication"), and that I wanted to assure you
> is not really an issue, as we are talking about a few kilobytes max.
Just to clear that up: by "nicely rendered form" I meant the general
"form", not an HTTP-form :)
Diez
alexbod...@gmail.com
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 09:15, Diez B. Roggisch<de...@web.de> wrote:
>
>>
>> However, you seemed to be concerned that using hidden input-fields to
>> transport the data, while showing some nicely rendered form of it would
>> be wasteful ("avoid data duplication"), and that I wanted to assure you
>> is not really an issue, as we are talking about a few kilobytes max.
>
an example usage of tw.output would be to show a new_user and an edit_user forms: they bth have the same fields, but in edit_user we'd avoid changing the username field.
in the edit_user action, the username field would be totally ingnored (especially since there's not a real field coming from the browser).
>
> Just to clear that up: by "nicely rendered form" I meant the general
> "form", not an HTTP-form :)
>
>
> Diez
>