cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Larson <...@keow.org>
Subject Re: [CForms binding] - New repeater (was:Re: TempRepeater vs. SimpleRepeater)
Date Mon, 01 Mar 2004 04:04:21 GMT
On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 09:35:27PM -0600, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> Hi Tim:

Hi Antonio, nice to hear from you again.

> Thanks for the description.

No problem, sorry it was slow coming.  My family has been sick
and that took precedence.

> Now I see to TempRepeater as a SimpleRpeater++. Is this correct?

Yes, exactly.

<snip/>
> 1- The Best: Allow repeater to define unique-row with more than 1 field.
<snip/>
> Back to (1), in order to allow multiple unique-ids, we need to change from
> attributes to elements: @unique-row-id and @unique-path
> 
> So in this way we can write:
> 
> <wb:repeater id="myRepeaterId" parent-path="." row-path="TheRowPath">
>   <wb:unique-row>
>     <wb:unique-field id="myId1" path="myId1"/>
>     <wb:unique-field id="myId2" path="myId2"/>
>   </wb:unique-row>
>   <wb:on-bind>
>     <wb:value id="myId1" path="myId1"/>
>     <wb:value id="myId2" path="myId2"/>
>     <wb:value id="field1" path="field1"/>
>     <wb:value id="field2" path="field2"/>
>   </wb:on-bind>
> </wb:repeater>
> 
> WDYT?

Looks good.  This is probably a common problem, and modifying the
regular wb:repeater to accept multiple unique row elements seems
like the right way to go.

> I need to have something like this for tomorrow. If this is OK. I will
> start to work right now on this.

--Tim Larson

Mime
View raw message