Joerg Heinicke dijo: > That's correct, but we also should have a future validation in mind. A > form definition like Daniel's sample below must raise an exception then. > Furthermore what happens if you have an additional widget (outside of > repeater) with @id="foo.1.foo". This must raise an exception too of > course thiugh the definition itself can be valid from XML point of view.
You are right, but I see a potential slowdown of the CForm transformer. AFAIK, these type of validation is interesting just at development time, but not in a production environment when the same definition (no changed) will be validated over and over. WDYT? Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo
