isis-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Cameron <>
Subject Re: Edit modes in Apache Isis
Date Wed, 25 May 2016 02:36:22 GMT
I know this has been discussed previously, but it seems such a central
thing that I have to add my two-bits worth again.

Re: "it positions the framework away from the common perception of it being
a CRUD framework;"

Any database application is at its core a CRUD application, unless its view
only. So the key thing, surely, is to show people how much more Isis can do
and how easily. It seems you want to be deliberately unfamiliar to users in
order to show that its different to those other 'CRUD in five minutes'

Making a group of properties read-only and providing an action to update
all the properties together is a useful pattern, but you seem to be
suggesting that this is the right way to do it everywhere because Estatio
is done that way.

I think the in-situ editing will be good as a default behaviour.

On the upside, I think Isis is now a very sweet framework to use in many,
many aspects. There is still alot for me to learn, but I am keen to do
that, and try to convince others of its merits too.


On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Dan Haywood <>

> Hi Hector,
> welcome to the users@ mailing list.
> I'm afraid that there isn't a setting to go back to the previous behaviour,
> but there are some good reasons - some practical, some more philosophical -
> why this change has been made.
> The practical reason is that with tabs, it's not particularly clear what a
> global edit should be... should it be for all properties, including those
> not visible on other tabs?  or should it somehow disable being able to
> switch tabs when in edit mode? or perhaps there should be not a global edit
> but instead an edit per fieldset/member group?  It wasn't at all clear
> which was preferable.
> Second, we've had a ticket knocking around for a while to move editing
> towards that in JIRA, where one clicks in the field and then can do an
> in-situ edit.  The current implementation isn't quite a slick as that, but
> the number of clicks is actually the same.
> The philosophical reason is that, actually, it positions the framework away
> from the common perception of it being a CRUD framework; instead it is also
> for (even mostly for) complex domains where the is significant business
> logic to transition from one state of the system to another.  When Jeroen
> was implementing Estatio [1] he deliberately made all fields read-only (in
> stark contrast to the packaged application it replaced), not because there
> wasn't a requirement to allow the data to be changed, but instead he wanted
> the business users to come back to him and explain WHY the data should be
> changed.  (For example, changing the end of a tenancy date has impact
> elsewhere).  So it helped us get a deeper insight into the domain, and we
> encoded that insight into actions.
> For the big Naked Objects system in Ireland, we also only have actions, no
> edits... eg award a pension claim or disallow a jobseekers allowance
> claim.  Even for small stuff, eg a customer wants to change their phone
> number, then this is an action because we then want to retain the old
> address on file in a list of previous phone numbers. Again, the action
> helps capture the intent.
> ~~~
> If you want to allow an object's properties to be changed in bulk, then I
> recommend that you add an action that accepts all the fields, and position
> that action on a top-level panel.  We do this for the contactapp [2].  For
> your remaining more complex objects, I suggest that you sprinkle in some
> tabs, by way of recompense.
> Hope that helps
> Dan
> [1]
> [2]
> On 23 May 2016 at 21:13, Hector Fabio Meza <>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > My company has been working on an Isis application in the last few
> > months, and after the changes to the edit functionality on 1.12.0, our
> > test users are asking if it's possible to put the whole form in edit
> > mode instead of doing it field by field.
> >
> > Is there a way to tell the wicket viewer to use the previous behavior,
> > i.e. an edit button that affects the whole form?
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> > Hector Fabio Meza Martínez
> >  R&D Leader
> > [1]
> >
> > Links:
> > ------
> > [1]
> >

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message