Joerg Heinicke wrote:
>Vadim Gritsenko <vadim <at> reverycodes.com> writes:
>
>
>
>>>>>I would think for the same reason one would otherwise wd:output instead
>>>>>of wd:field. In this case one would however need a wd:multivalueOutput
>>>>>widget.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Yes, but why not type=output?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>because an output widget doesn't read its value from the request. With a
>>>normal (multivalue)field widget, the value can always be modified by
>>>adding the appropriate request parameters.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Aha. Now this makes sense. +1 to multivalueoutput
>>
>>
>
>Instead of adding an additional output widget for every type of existing widgets
>would it not make more sense to add an attribute or additional element to the
>existing widgets similar to the binding's direction="load"?
>
>
How would that work for <wd:multivalue> field? I guess it would then
become <wi:output> with multiple nested <wi:value>s. But what attribute
/ element are you suggesting?
Vadim
|