I agree - the implementation is inconsistent and confusing.
I would like to work on it.
-Adrian
David E Jones wrote:
It sounds like a good pattern, but which classes would extend from this
base class?
For the form widget there are a few places that could use an id. These
SHOULD follow the same pattern as the "*style" attributes, but
evidently whoever added them didn't feel the need... or perhaps didn't
like the pattern?
Anyway, for example on the field element the attribute is called "id-
name", though it really should be "widget-id" and there really SHOULD
be other attributes that go along with it like "title-id" and possibly
others like "widget-area-id" and "title-area-id".
In fact, I hadn't looked at this in detail before but looking at it now
the inconsistency and confusion (perhaps causing this thread even?)
bother me and I'd like to see the "id-name" attribute removed (pulled
from the XSD, still supported in the parsing code, just like in many
other places so we get a warning, or parse error really, but it will
still work).
Is anyone working on this, or interested in doing so in the near future
(before the coming waves of other topics wash this out ;) )?
-David
On Nov 26, 2007, at 12:03 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
David,
Thank you for the clarification. I also suggested at the time that
all of the widgets could be extended from a simple base class that
contains common attributes like style, id, etc.
-Adrian
David E Jones wrote:
The concept you are talking about is correct in general Adrian, but
means something different than your interpretation here. The intent
of the screen, form and other widgets is to define structure and
business level artifacts (not technical or visual). They are meant
to be externally styled, hence the use of "style" attributes, and
yes even "id" attributes.
In other words, certain elements in the screen and form widgets
(didn't check the others) already DO have id attributes on them,
and if necessary we could add it to others as well.
-David
On Nov 26, 2007, at 9:14 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
I had suggested adding the ID attribute (and others) to all widget
elements earlier this year. The response was that we shouldn't tie
widget code too closely to HTML output, since the intent is to use
widgets to render to more than one output format.
-Adrian
Jonathon -- Improov wrote:
I did this on a private Widget Engine enhancement, along with
AJAX. Unfortunately, that enhancement was licensed private months
ago. Sorry.
Frankly, I don't think the "id" attribute is really great. It's
always possible, maybe even preferable, to reference HTML
elements in a structured DOM way.
I'd be willing to discuss this further if some of us are
committed to working on this and putting it back to OFBiz.
Jonathon
Anil Patel wrote:
Hi,
Some Form Widget elements don't have "id" attribute. Id on html
elements
makes them lot easier to work with from Javascript. I'll
appreciate If
somebody evaluate possibility of having id attribute on all form
widget
elements and possibly implement them.
Regards
Anil Patel
