Comments inline...
--- Jacopo Cappellato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Chris,
> 
> before we go too far with the implementation effort I think that we 
> should refine the
> But again, I don't see this as a major improvement because:
> 
> 1) it is a bit subjective to say if it easier for users to have many 
> attributes in the form element or less attributes in a more complex 
> structure

I certainly agree on it being subjective.  This goes back to my first
post on this topic of why I shy away from using form widget. There are
45 attributes and fully half of them have a powerful, but minor impact
on the use and reuse of the form.  If it were possible to order the
presentation of attributes, that would normally be sufficient. 
However,  XML mandates that attributes are not ordered. So, other means
are necessary to reduce the importance of these attributes to the
developer, especially new developers.

> 2) the <styling/> tag will just wrap all the form 'header' styles,
> while 
> all the field level ones will continue to be scattered around at the 
> field level

For consistency, adding it to the fields is certainly a possible
improvement, but we need to make a decision on the form element before
contemplating it on the field element.

> 3) as soon as all the default styles will be removed from form 
> definitions (after the widget/css refactoring process is complete), 
> using these attribute will be pretty rare

That's terrific, rev 511769 should at the very least make it simple
work to remove them from the definition. Even after they're removed
they'll still show up in the code complete as options and confuse a new
user even more since there will possibly not be an example of their
usage in the active portion of the project.  
> 

In addition to the clutter of the attributes that exists today, with
greater use of ajax in ofbiz, it's only a matter of time before
additional attributes will be needed to allow form widgets to utilize
them.  Adding them to the form element will just compound the code
complete problem.  With a <styling> element, there's a natural home for
these improvements.

Reply via email to