Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Nicolas Malin]

Thanks a lot Jacques for this sentence

Nicolas


Le 22/09/2016 à 17:55, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
Now I'm thinking: there is a reason why people think <>.


So I will add a small sentence saying to look before for a possible 
FormFieldTitle_ in the autocompletion help (widget-form.xsd)


Jacques


Le 22/09/2016 à 14:22, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
Thanks for the reminder Nicolas, since nobody opposes I reverted at 
revision: 1761923


Jacques


Le 22/09/2016 à 13:36, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
I see no  improvement to use a dedicate title as same the 
FormFieldTitle.


More a form is light, more is readable and maintainable. Yes I'm 
lazy, and it's good for my healthy :)


If we change or improve the engine for the label, all specific use 
would be manage direclty.


On the other way, if you want surcharge the label, you can do on 
your component, or/and surcharge the form with the specific label.


Nicolas


Le 21/09/2016 à 17:45, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that 
everybody agree about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature


So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment 
to raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this 
discussion back in the limbo


Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 16:04, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Jacques,

please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history 
cleaner.


Thanks,

Michael


Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please 
help yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D)


Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in 
the future
then we must take a decision to stop using 
convention-over-configuration
for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that 
convention then

we should remove the related code accordingly.

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl 


wrote:


I'd suggest to revert this commit.

Thanks,

Michael

Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne:


Hi Jacques,

Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title 
when and
FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion 
(i did not

check these ones).


Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066

Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :


Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. 
Often these

field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
(common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could 
be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType 
could be used)


This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable 
issues as

sub tasks
   to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of 
labels in the

CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: 
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/
myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687
=1761686=1761687=diff

==
--- 
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

(original)
+++ 
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml 
Wed

Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
   
   title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName

}">
   position="2">
ld>
-
+title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc

ription}">
   
   title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}"
widget-style="smallSubmit">button-type="button"/>

   
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
   
   
   position="2">

-
-size="60"/>
+title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName

}">
+title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"

position="2">
   
   
   

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Jacques Le Roux]

Now I'm thinking: there is a reason why people think <>.

So I will add a small sentence saying to look before for a possible 
FormFieldTitle_ in the autocompletion help (widget-form.xsd)

Jacques


Le 22/09/2016 à 14:22, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Thanks for the reminder Nicolas, since nobody opposes I reverted at revision: 
1761923

Jacques


Le 22/09/2016 à 13:36, Nicolas Malin a écrit :

I see no  improvement to use a dedicate title as same the FormFieldTitle.

More a form is light, more is readable and maintainable. Yes I'm lazy, and it's 
good for my healthy :)

If we change or improve the engine for the label, all specific use would be 
manage direclty.

On the other way, if you want surcharge the label, you can do on your 
component, or/and surcharge the form with the specific label.

Nicolas


Le 21/09/2016 à 17:45, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that everybody agree 
about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature

So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment to raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this discussion 
back in the limbo


Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 16:04, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Jacques,

please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history cleaner.

Thanks,

Michael


Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:

I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help yourselves 
(Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D)

Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :

I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future
then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration
for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention then
we should remove the related code accordingly.

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl 
wrote:


I'd suggest to revert this commit.

Thanks,

Michael

Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne:


Hi Jacques,

Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and
FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
check these ones).


Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066

Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :


Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these
field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
(common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)

This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as
sub tasks
   to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/
myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687
=1761686=1761687=diff

==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
(original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed
Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
   
   
   
-
+
   
   
   
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
   
   
   
-
-
+
+
   
   
   

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Jacques Le Roux]

Thanks for the reminder Nicolas, since nobody opposes I reverted at revision: 
1761923

Jacques


Le 22/09/2016 à 13:36, Nicolas Malin a écrit :

I see no  improvement to use a dedicate title as same the FormFieldTitle.

More a form is light, more is readable and maintainable. Yes I'm lazy, and it's 
good for my healthy :)

If we change or improve the engine for the label, all specific use would be 
manage direclty.

On the other way, if you want surcharge the label, you can do on your 
component, or/and surcharge the form with the specific label.

Nicolas


Le 21/09/2016 à 17:45, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that everybody agree 
about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature

So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment to raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this discussion back 
in the limbo


Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 16:04, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Jacques,

please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history cleaner.

Thanks,

Michael


Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:

I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help yourselves 
(Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D)

Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :

I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future
then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration
for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention then
we should remove the related code accordingly.

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl 
wrote:


I'd suggest to revert this commit.

Thanks,

Michael

Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne:


Hi Jacques,

Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and
FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
check these ones).


Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066

Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :


Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these
field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
(common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)

This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as
sub tasks
   to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/
myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687
=1761686=1761687=diff

==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
(original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed
Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
   
   
   
-
+
   
   
   
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
   
   
   
-
-
+
+
   
   
   

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Nicolas Malin]

I see no  improvement to use a dedicate title as same the FormFieldTitle.

More a form is light, more is readable and maintainable. Yes I'm lazy, 
and it's good for my healthy :)


If we change or improve the engine for the label, all specific use would 
be manage direclty.


On the other way, if you want surcharge the label, you can do on your 
component, or/and surcharge the form with the specific label.


Nicolas


Le 21/09/2016 à 17:45, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that 
everybody agree about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature


So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment to 
raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this 
discussion back in the limbo


Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 16:04, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Jacques,

please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history 
cleaner.


Thanks,

Michael


Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help 
yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D)


Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the 
future
then we must take a decision to stop using 
convention-over-configuration
for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that 
convention then

we should remove the related code accordingly.

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl 


wrote:


I'd suggest to revert this commit.

Thanks,

Michael

Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne:


Hi Jacques,

Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title 
when and
FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i 
did not

check these ones).


Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066

Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :


Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. 
Often these

field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
(common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be 
used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could 
be used)


This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable 
issues as

sub tasks
   to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels 
in the

CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: 
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/
myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687
=1761686=1761687=diff

==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
(original)
+++ 
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed

Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
   
   title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName

}">
   position="2">
ld>
-
+
   
   title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}"

widget-style="smallSubmit">
   
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
   
   
   position="2">

-
-size="60"/>
+title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName

}">
+title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"

position="2">
   
   
   

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Pierre Smits]

Nice that you're trying to keep this alive, Jacques. But there is basically
nothing to discuss as it is a done deal.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 5:45 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

> I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that everybody
> agree about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature
>
> So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment to
> raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this discussion
> back in the limbo
>
> Jacques
>
>
>
> Le 21/09/2016 à 16:04, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>
>> Jacques,
>>
>> please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history cleaner.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>
>>> I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help
>>> yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D)
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
>>>
 I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the
 future
 then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration
 for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention
 then
 we should remove the related code accordingly.

 On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl <
 michael.br...@ecomify.de>
 wrote:

 I'd suggest to revert this commit.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
>
> Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne:
>
> Hi Jacques,
>>
>> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
>> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332
>>
>> I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and
>> FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did
>> not
>> check these ones).
>>
>>
>> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
>> entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
>> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066
>>
>> Gil
>>
>> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :
>>
>> Author: jleroux
>>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
>>> New Revision: 1761687
>>>
>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
>>> Log:
>>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
>>> applications
>>> (OFBIZ-8110)
>>>
>>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often
>>> these
>>> field
>>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
>>> (common) label
>>> could have sufficed.
>>>
>>> As examples you can take:
>>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
>>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be
>>> used)
>>>
>>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues
>>> as
>>> sub tasks
>>>to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in
>>> the
>>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.
>>>
>>> Thanks: Pierre Smits
>>>
>>> Modified:
>>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
>>>
>>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.
>>> xml
>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/
>>> myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687
>>> =1761686=1761687=diff
>>> 
>>> ==
>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
>>> (original)
>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
>>> Wed
>>> Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
>>>>> position="2">
>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName
>>> }">
>>>>> position="2">>> ld>
>>> -
>>> +
>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}">
>>>>> widget-style="smallSubmit">
>>>
>>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
>>>
>>>
>>>>> position="2">
>>> -
>>> ->> size="60"/>
>>> +
>>> +>> position="2">
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Jacques Le Roux]

I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that everybody agree 
about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature

So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment to raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this discussion back in 
the limbo


Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 16:04, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Jacques,

please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history cleaner.

Thanks,

Michael


Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:

I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help yourselves 
(Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D)

Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :

I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future
then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration
for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention then
we should remove the related code accordingly.

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl 
wrote:


I'd suggest to revert this commit.

Thanks,

Michael

Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne:


Hi Jacques,

Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and
FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
check these ones).


Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066

Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :


Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these
field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
(common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)

This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as
sub tasks
   to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/
myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687
=1761686=1761687=diff

==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
(original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed
Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
   
   
   
-
+
   
   
   
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
   
   
   
-
-
+
+
   
   
   

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Michael Brohl]

Jacques,

please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history cleaner.

Thanks,

Michael


Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help 
yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D)


Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the 
future

then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration
for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention 
then

we should remove the related code accordingly.

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl 


wrote:


I'd suggest to revert this commit.

Thanks,

Michael

Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne:


Hi Jacques,

Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and
FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i 
did not

check these ones).


Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066

Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :


Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often 
these

field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
(common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could 
be used)


This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable 
issues as

sub tasks
   to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels 
in the

CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: 
ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/
myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687
=1761686=1761687=diff

==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
(original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed
Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
   
   title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName

}">
   position="2">
ld>
-
+
   
   title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}"

widget-style="smallSubmit">
   
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
   
   
   position="2">

-
-size="60"/>

+
+title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"

position="2">
   
   
   












smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Jacques Le Roux]

I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help yourselves 
(Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D)

Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :

I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future
then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration
for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention then
we should remove the related code accordingly.

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl 
wrote:


I'd suggest to revert this commit.

Thanks,

Michael

Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne:


Hi Jacques,

Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and
FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
check these ones).


Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066

Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :


Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these
field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
(common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)

This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as
sub tasks
   to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
  ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/
myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687
=1761686=1761687=diff

==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
(original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed
Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
   
   
   
-
+
   
   
   
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
   
   
   
-
-
+
+
   
   
   

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Jacques Le Roux]

I don't think the performance argument is solid here

But the FormFieldTitle_ thing is questionnable, yes. Even if I must say I missed this point when I committed this in my haste to close OFBIZ-8110. I'm 
actually slightly for FormFieldTitle_s, though it's maybe blurring things a bit, really a moot point to me.


Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit :

FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz Demo
implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use
{code}{code}
as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms.

Unfortunately that doesn't work for all.

Furthermore, like I said in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501193
A specific title applied processes faster than none applied.

Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when one
takes the context into consideration.
E.g.

CommonProduct

vs

AccountingProduct

ManufacturingProduct

OrderProduct

WorkEffortProduct
PartyProduct

FormFieldTitle_Product

ScrumProduct

EtcProduct


Best regards,

Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne <
gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:


Hi Jacques,
Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F
ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
check these ones).

Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066

Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :

Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)

This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks
  to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
 ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687=1761686=1761687=diff
==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 
07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
+
  
  
  
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
-
+
+
  
  
  

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Jacques Le Roux]

This is a moot point, ask Christian :)

Jacques


Le 21/09/2016 à 09:47, gil portenseigne a écrit :


Hi Jacques,

Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: 
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not 
check these ones).


Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedCommentId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066


Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :

Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)

This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks
  to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
 ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687=1761686=1761687=diff
==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 
07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
+
  
  
  
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
-
+
+
  
  
  

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Pierre Smits]

So what is the point you're trying to make?

Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:18 PM, gil portenseigne <
gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:

> Yes i did express myself bad :), it was not a point i wanted to insist on.
> Sorry for the distraction.
>
> Le 21/09/2016 à 12:16, Pierre Smits a écrit :
>
> No it doesn't. In fact it is completely off. Because the inclusion of the
> component name (MyComponent, in your reference) is nowhere required.
>
> Unless I am misunderstanding you.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> ORRTIZ.COM  
> OFBiz based solutions & services
>
> OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:59 AM, gil portenseigne 
>  wrote:
>
>
> In the commit for instance :
>
> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"
>
> the MyComponent/Common explain both possible cases...
>
> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:52, Pierre Smits a écrit :
>
>
> HI Gil,
>
> Where do you see "uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX"  in widgets and
> templates? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. But in each (most?) component
> you'll find
> {code} global=
> "true"/>
> {code}
>
> And for what it is worth: a product in manufacturing, accounting, party,
> workeffort or any other component referencing a product from the product
> component is a product. No difference in context.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
> ORRTIZ.COM  
> OFBiz based solutions & services
>
> OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:25 AM, gil portenseigne 
>  wrote:
>
> Hi Pierre,
>
>
> I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer (and
> i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to be
> sma
> rtly lazy :) ).
>
> The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields
> allow
> speed developpment and is far more readable than having
> title="uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX" everywhere in your form
> file... And if you want to overload this label its very easy. I don't see
> the problem here.
>
> inline
> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit :
>
> FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz
> Demo
> implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use
> {code} default-field-type=""
> />{code}
> as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms.
>
> Unfortunately that doesn't work for all.
>
> Furthermore, like I said inhttps://issues.apache.org/ji
> ra/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193=com 
> .
> atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-
> tabpanel#comment-15501193
> A specific title applied processes faster than none applied.
>
> How much ? For display i guess it's not significant.
>
>
> Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when
> one
> takes the context into consideration.
>
> Labels for products or others object could be different in each
> component,
> thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX
>
> Regards,
>
> Gil
>
>
> E.g.
>
> CommonProduct
>
> vs
>
> AccountingProduct
>
> ManufacturingProduct
>
> OrderProduct
>
> WorkEffortProduct
> PartyProduct
>
> FormFieldTitle_Product
>
> ScrumProduct
>
> EtcProduct
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre SmitsORRTIZ.COM   
>  
>
> OFBiz based solutions & services
>
> OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne 
>  wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jacques,
> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit 
> answer:http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332
>
> I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F
> ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
> check these ones).
>
> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA 
> :https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
> entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066
>
> Gil
>
> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :
>
> Author: jleroux
> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
> New Revision: 1761687
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
> Log:
> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
> applications
> (OFBIZ-8110)
>
> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these
> field
> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
> (common) label
> could have sufficed.
>
> As examples you can take:
> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
> * the various 

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[gil portenseigne]

Yes idid express myself bad :), it was not a point i wanted to insist 
on. Sorry for the distraction.



Le 21/09/2016 à 12:16, Pierre Smits a écrit :

No it doesn't. In fact it is completely off. Because the inclusion of the
component name (MyComponent, in your reference) is nowhere required.

Unless I am misunderstanding you.

Best regards,


Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:59 AM, gil portenseigne <
gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:


In the commit for instance :

title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"

the MyComponent/Common explain both possible cases...

Le 21/09/2016 à 11:52, Pierre Smits a écrit :


HI Gil,

Where do you see "uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX"  in widgets and
templates? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. But in each (most?) component
you'll find
{code}
{code}

And for what it is worth: a product in manufacturing, accounting, party,
workeffort or any other component referencing a product from the product
component is a product. No difference in context.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:25 AM, gil portenseigne <
gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:

Hi Pierre,

I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer (and
i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to be
sma
rtly lazy :) ).

The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields
allow
speed developpment and is far more readable than having
title="uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX" everywhere in your form
file... And if you want to overload this label its very easy. I don't see
the problem here.

inline
Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit :

FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz
Demo
implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use
{code}{code}
as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms.

Unfortunately that doesn't work for all.

Furthermore, like I said inhttps://issues.apache.org/ji
ra/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193=com.
atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-
tabpanel#comment-15501193
A specific title applied processes faster than none applied.

How much ? For display i guess it's not significant.


Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when
one
takes the context into consideration.

Labels for products or others object could be different in each
component,
thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX

Regards,

Gil


E.g.

CommonProduct

vs

AccountingProduct

ManufacturingProduct

OrderProduct

WorkEffortProduct
PartyProduct

FormFieldTitle_Product

ScrumProduct

EtcProduct


Best regards,

Pierre Smits
ORRTIZ.COM  

OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/


On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne <
gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:


Hi Jacques,
Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F
ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
check these ones).

Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066

Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :

Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these
field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
(common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)

This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as
sub tasks
   to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
  ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/mypo
rtal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687=1761686=
1761687=diff

==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
(original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Pierre Smits]

No it doesn't. In fact it is completely off. Because the inclusion of the
component name (MyComponent, in your reference) is nowhere required.

Unless I am misunderstanding you.

Best regards,


Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:59 AM, gil portenseigne <
gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:

> In the commit for instance :
>
> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"
>
> the MyComponent/Common explain both possible cases...
>
> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:52, Pierre Smits a écrit :
>
>> HI Gil,
>>
>> Where do you see "uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX"  in widgets and
>> templates? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. But in each (most?) component
>> you'll find
>> {code}> global=
>> "true"/>
>> {code}
>>
>> And for what it is worth: a product in manufacturing, accounting, party,
>> workeffort or any other component referencing a product from the product
>> component is a product. No difference in context.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Pierre Smits
>>
>> ORRTIZ.COM 
>> OFBiz based solutions & services
>>
>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:25 AM, gil portenseigne <
>> gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Pierre,
>>>
>>> I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer (and
>>> i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to be
>>> sma
>>> rtly lazy :) ).
>>>
>>> The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields
>>> allow
>>> speed developpment and is far more readable than having
>>> title="uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX" everywhere in your form
>>> file... And if you want to overload this label its very easy. I don't see
>>> the problem here.
>>>
>>> inline
>>> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit :
>>>
>>> FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz
>>> Demo
>>> implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use
>>> {code}>> default-field-type=""
>>> />{code}
>>> as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately that doesn't work for all.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, like I said inhttps://issues.apache.org/ji
>>> ra/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193=com.
>>> atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-
>>> tabpanel#comment-15501193
>>> A specific title applied processes faster than none applied.
>>>
>>> How much ? For display i guess it's not significant.
>>>
>>>
>>> Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when
>>> one
>>> takes the context into consideration.
>>>
>>> Labels for products or others object could be different in each
>>> component,
>>> thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Gil
>>>
>>>
>>> E.g.
>>>
>>> CommonProduct
>>>
>>> vs
>>>
>>> AccountingProduct
>>>
>>> ManufacturingProduct
>>>
>>> OrderProduct
>>>
>>> WorkEffortProduct
>>> PartyProduct
>>>
>>> FormFieldTitle_Product
>>>
>>> ScrumProduct
>>>
>>> EtcProduct
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Pierre Smits
>>> ORRTIZ.COM  
>>>
>>> OFBiz based solutions & services
>>>
>>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne <
>>> gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Jacques,
>>> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
>>> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332
>>>
>>> I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F
>>> ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
>>> check these ones).
>>>
>>> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
>>> entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
>>> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066
>>>
>>> Gil
>>>
>>> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :
>>>
>>> Author: jleroux
>>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
>>> New Revision: 1761687
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
>>> Log:
>>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
>>> applications
>>> (OFBIZ-8110)
>>>
>>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these
>>> field
>>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
>>> (common) label
>>> could have sufficed.
>>>
>>> As examples you can take:
>>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
>>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)
>>>
>>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as
>>> sub tasks
>>>   to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
>>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.
>>>
>>> Thanks: Pierre Smits
>>>
>>> Modified:
>>>  

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[gil portenseigne]

In the commit for instance :

title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"

the MyComponent/Common explain both possible cases...

Le 21/09/2016 à 11:52, Pierre Smits a écrit :

HI Gil,

Where do you see "uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX"  in widgets and
templates? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. But in each (most?) component
you'll find
{code}
{code}

And for what it is worth: a product in manufacturing, accounting, party,
workeffort or any other component referencing a product from the product
component is a product. No difference in context.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:25 AM, gil portenseigne <
gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:


Hi Pierre,

I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer (and
i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to be sma
rtly lazy :) ).

The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields allow
speed developpment and is far more readable than having
title="uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX" everywhere in your form
file... And if you want to overload this label its very easy. I don't see
the problem here.

inline
Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit :

FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz Demo
implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use
{code}{code}
as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms.

Unfortunately that doesn't work for all.

Furthermore, like I said 
inhttps://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501193
A specific title applied processes faster than none applied.

How much ? For display i guess it's not significant.


Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when one
takes the context into consideration.

Labels for products or others object could be different in each component,
thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX

Regards,

Gil


E.g.

CommonProduct

vs

AccountingProduct

ManufacturingProduct

OrderProduct

WorkEffortProduct
PartyProduct

FormFieldTitle_Product

ScrumProduct

EtcProduct


Best regards,

Pierre Smits
ORRTIZ.COM  

OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne  
wrote:


Hi Jacques,
Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit 
answer:http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F
ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
check these ones).

Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA 
:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066

Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :

Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)

This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks
  to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
 ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687=1761686=1761687=diff
==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 
07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
+
  
  
  
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
-
+
+
  
  
  

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Pierre Smits]

HI Gil,

Where do you see "uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX"  in widgets and
templates? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. But in each (most?) component
you'll find
{code}
{code}

And for what it is worth: a product in manufacturing, accounting, party,
workeffort or any other component referencing a product from the product
component is a product. No difference in context.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:25 AM, gil portenseigne <
gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:

> Hi Pierre,
>
> I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer (and
> i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to be sma
> rtly lazy :) ).
>
> The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields allow
> speed developpment and is far more readable than having
> title="uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX" everywhere in your form
> file... And if you want to overload this label its very easy. I don't see
> the problem here.
>
> inline
> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit :
>
> FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz Demo
> implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use
> {code} />{code}
> as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms.
>
> Unfortunately that doesn't work for all.
>
> Furthermore, like I said 
> inhttps://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501193
> A specific title applied processes faster than none applied.
>
> How much ? For display i guess it's not significant.
>
>
> Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when one
> takes the context into consideration.
>
> Labels for products or others object could be different in each component,
> thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX
>
> Regards,
>
> Gil
>
>
> E.g.
>
> CommonProduct
>
> vs
>
> AccountingProduct
>
> ManufacturingProduct
>
> OrderProduct
>
> WorkEffortProduct
> PartyProduct
>
> FormFieldTitle_Product
>
> ScrumProduct
>
> EtcProduct
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
> ORRTIZ.COM  
>
> OFBiz based solutions & services
>
> OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne 
>  wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jacques,
> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit 
> answer:http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332
>
> I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F
> ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
> check these ones).
>
> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA 
> :https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
> entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066
>
> Gil
>
> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :
>
> Author: jleroux
> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
> New Revision: 1761687
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
> Log:
> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications
> (OFBIZ-8110)
>
> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field
> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) 
> label
> could have sufficed.
>
> As examples you can take:
> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)
>
> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub 
> tasks
>  to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.
>
> Thanks: Pierre Smits
>
> Modified:
> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
>
> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
> URL: 
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687=1761686=1761687=diff
> ==
> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original)
> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 
> 07:34:13 2016
> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
>  
>   title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}">
>  
> -
> + title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}">
>   title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}">
>   widget-style="smallSubmit">
>  
> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
>  
>  
>  
> -
> -
> + title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}">
> + position="2">
>  
>  
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Taher Alkhateeb]

I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future
then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration
for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention then
we should remove the related code accordingly.

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl 
wrote:

> I'd suggest to revert this commit.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
>
> Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne:
>
>>
>> Hi Jacques,
>>
>> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
>> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332
>>
>> I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and
>> FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
>> check these ones).
>>
>>
>> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
>> entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
>> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066
>>
>> Gil
>>
>> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :
>>
>>> Author: jleroux
>>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
>>> New Revision: 1761687
>>>
>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
>>> Log:
>>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various
>>> applications
>>> (OFBIZ-8110)
>>>
>>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these
>>> field
>>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared
>>> (common) label
>>> could have sufficed.
>>>
>>> As examples you can take:
>>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
>>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)
>>>
>>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as
>>> sub tasks
>>>   to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
>>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.
>>>
>>> Thanks: Pierre Smits
>>>
>>> Modified:
>>>  ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
>>>
>>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/
>>> myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687
>>> =1761686=1761687=diff
>>> 
>>> ==
>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
>>> (original)
>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed
>>> Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
>>>   >> position="2">
>>>   
>>>   >> ld>
>>> -
>>> +
>>>   >> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}">
>>>   >> widget-style="smallSubmit">
>>>   
>>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
>>>   
>>>   
>>>   
>>> -
>>> -
>>> +
>>> +>> position="2">
>>>   
>>>   
>>>   
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Michael Brohl]

Hi Gil,

Am 21.09.16 um 11:25 schrieb gil portenseigne:
Labels for products or others object could be different in each 
component, thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX


I agree, this would be an unwanted regression.

Regards,

Michael





smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[gil portenseigne]

Hi Pierre,

I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer 
(and i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to 
be smartly lazy :) ).


The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields 
allow speed developpmentand is far more readable thanhaving 
title="uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX" everywhere in your form 
file... And if you want to overload this label its very easy. Idon't see 
the problem here.



inline
Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit :

FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz Demo
implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use
{code}{code}
as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms.

Unfortunately that doesn't work for all.

Furthermore, like I said in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501193
A specific title applied processes faster than none applied.

How much ? For display i guess it's not significant.


Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when one
takes the context into consideration.
Labels for products or others object could be different in each 
component, thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX


Regards,

Gil

E.g.

CommonProduct

vs

AccountingProduct

ManufacturingProduct

OrderProduct

WorkEffortProduct
PartyProduct

FormFieldTitle_Product

ScrumProduct

EtcProduct


Best regards,

Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne <
gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:


Hi Jacques,
Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332

I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F
ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
check these ones).

Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066

Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :

Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)

This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks
  to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
 ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687=1761686=1761687=diff
==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 
07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
+
  
  
  
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
-
+
+
  
  
  

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Michael Brohl]

I'd suggest to revert this commit.

Thanks,

Michael

Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne:


Hi Jacques,

Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: 
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332


I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and 
FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did 
not check these ones).


Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedCommentId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066


Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :

Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)

This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks
  to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
 ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687=1761686=1761687=diff
==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 
07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
+
  
  
  
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
-
+
+
  
  
  









smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[Pierre Smits]

FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz Demo
implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use
{code}{code}
as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms.

Unfortunately that doesn't work for all.

Furthermore, like I said in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501193
A specific title applied processes faster than none applied.

Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when one
takes the context into consideration.
E.g.

CommonProduct

vs

AccountingProduct

ManufacturingProduct

OrderProduct

WorkEffortProduct
PartyProduct

FormFieldTitle_Product

ScrumProduct

EtcProduct


Best regards,

Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne <
gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:

> Hi Jacques,
> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:
> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332
>
> I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F
> ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not
> check these ones).
>
> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm
> entId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.
> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066
>
> Gil
>
> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :
>
> Author: jleroux
> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
> New Revision: 1761687
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
> Log:
> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications
> (OFBIZ-8110)
>
> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field
> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) 
> label
> could have sufficed.
>
> As examples you can take:
> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)
>
> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub 
> tasks
>  to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.
>
> Thanks: Pierre Smits
>
> Modified:
> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
>
> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
> URL: 
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687=1761686=1761687=diff
> ==
> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original)
> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 
> 07:34:13 2016
> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
>  
>   title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}">
>  
> -
> + title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}">
>   title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}">
>   widget-style="smallSubmit">
>  
> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
>  
>  
>  
> -
> -
> + title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}">
> + position="2">
>  
>  
>  
>
>
>
>
>

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

[gil portenseigne]

Hi Jacques,

Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: 
http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332


I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and 
FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did 
not check these ones).


Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedCommentId=15501066=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066


Gil

Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, jler...@apache.org a écrit :

Author: jleroux
Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016
New Revision: 1761687

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687=rev
Log:
Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications
(OFBIZ-8110)

There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field
definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label
could have sufficed.

As examples you can take:
* the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used)
* the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used)

This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks
  to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the
CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress.

Thanks: Pierre Smits

Modified:
 ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687=1761686=1761687=diff
==
--- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 
07:34:13 2016
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
+
  
  
  
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License.
  
  
  
-
-
+
+