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 04:36:51 GMT
On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 10:22:17PM -0600, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> >> <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.
> 
> Thanks for your comment. It was helpfull. Now, I will start this new
> repeater as another repeater (Repeater2) in the "repeater family" and if
> everybody agree we will be able to switch soon to this new repeater. OK?

Consider adding this to the regular wb:repeater; if the unique*
attributes are not present then have the repeater builder look to see
if the <wb:unique-*/> elements are present.  I do not think this would
upset anyone, and if we later decide we want to get rid of the unique*
attributes we can do so with minimal changes.

I hope we can eventually merge all the repeater bindings to all use
the same <wb:repeater/> element and just have the different types of
repeater binding definition objects be created based on the attributes
and elements present.  Last I remember this topic was still under
discussion, however.

--Tim Larson

Mime
View raw message