On 2009-9-10 17:23, Martin Aspeli wrote:
If you're actively discouraging the solution we do have that works
today, you're not interested in improving it, and you'd like to see some
other solution that doesn't exist yet take its place, then I fear we're
at an impasse and we'll never get anywhere.
As you say, z3c.form (in design principle if nothing else) meets a need
(schema-based forms) that is quite common in Plone. When we did the UI
support for Dexterity, it was the only good alternative we had, since
formlib was both being abandoned by its maintainers and proved too
inflexible and awkward to work with, and hand-written forms would be,
well, silly.
I am saying that for Plone z3c.form is a possibly good alternative for
generated forms, but that right now in my opinion it needs some work to
meet Plone user interface and markup standards. I am also saying that I
personally am not willing to do that work since my priorities are
elsewhere. I am not trying to provide stop energy here - my only goal is
to make sure that we are not going to reduce the Plone UI because our
attention is too focused on shiny new technology.
I'd also guess that the HTML markup from the default widgets is probably
not as important to everyone else as it seems to be to you.
The markup for z3c.form is both overly complex as well as very different
than the markup patterns Plone uses. This means that styling a Plone
site which uses z3c.form as well as Archetypes is twice as hard since it
requires writing CSS for two different markup patterns.
Wichert.
--
Wichert Akkerman <wich...@wiggy.net> It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/ It is hard to make things simple.
_______________________________________________
Framework-Team mailing list
Framework-Team@lists.plone.org
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
