On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 15:24, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 14:18, Caleb James DeLisle > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, I would like to propose a change in direction. > > > > I think the practice of marrying form fields to class properties > > should be discontinued. > > Including form information in the class property makes certain jobs > > easier but XObjects do not always represent forms and marrying > > something as high level as forms with something as low level as > > objects makes code maintenance exceedingly difficult, not to mention > > the general ugliness of code in xwiki-core which generates HTML. > > Uge +1 on this, I never liked theses display properties that has > nothing to do with datas. It should be client job to decide how best > displaying/editing datas like we do with the macros and WYSIWYG. > Caleb and Thomas, I completely follow you on these points, you have my big +1 as well. > > IMO it's very important that at some point we have the same kind of > descriptors for macro, objects and any other entity with configurable > typed parameters. For constraints I wrote some quick design some time > ago for the WSIWYG needs on > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Design/Propertiesdisplayers. > > > > > I would like to start development of 3 new XWikiDocuments: > > XWiki.FormClass, > > XWiki.FormFieldClass and > > XWiki.FormFieldConstraintClass. > > Much of the code in XWiki.Registration will be ported to these > > classes. The fields will be validated twice, once at the client side > > with LiveValidation, and once at the server side. > This is exactly what I thought when I have first seen that code, that it was more generic than for what it have been written initially. It will require some more tuning and discussion later, but it is a very good starting point for me. > > > > I would then like to deprecate the use of the display related > > settings in the class editor and eventually remove them from the > > class editor entirely. > Deprecation will have to be slow to avoid disruption of legacy code, and IMO should not happend until we have a new object Model replacing the old one. Denis > > > > I envision a form being made and fields added similar to the way we > > add objects to a document. Likewise, each field will be defined by > > selecting a display type from a predefined list then adding > > validation constraint objects to the field. > > > > I have not started development on this and I am sure there will be > > plenty more to discuss later. What I want to know is whether people > > think this is the right direction. > > > > WDYT? > > Yep this is the right decision and we already started to go this path > on the rendering/WYSIWYG side so +1 ;) > > > > > Caleb > > > > _______________________________________________ > > devs mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > > > > > > -- > Thomas Mortagne > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO eGuilde sarl - CTO _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
