> Yes I am referring to toForm but note that you can provide your own
> template. Please see formTemplate.

I did, thanks for the pointer. formTemplate applies to the record as a
whole, right? If I want to render a record differently, I could set
different templates one after the other - even though this introduces
more evil state dependence.

Just trying to figure out how to how to solve my case where a field is
supposed to be rendered differently in different contexts - a single
asXHtml variable doesn't seem to allow this.

Also, all the formatting happens in what I thought was the DB
abstraction layer, which still makes context-sensitive formatting
difficult (again, as I understand things right know) - it's just
personal style, but I like to keep control flow and view stuff outside
my data models.

But record promises to give me a lot more flexibility than mapper,
that's great.

> I think the existent scaladocs can
> be quite helpful.

Point taken ;-)

> Nevertheless for youimediate needs the Record is probably not very
> relevant yet as DB for Recrd is not yet implemented. I was just
> pointing out that forms&form validations are consistently provided by
> Record. I think there is still some level of validation in mappers but
> I haven't played with it yet ...

Oh, the validation is working just fine with mapper. It's only the
lack of flexibility with respect to automated output that's I'm
talking about.

Best,
Clemens

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to