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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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).