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"? Joerg
