On Mon, 09 Apr 2007 11:32:25 -0700, Rob Miller
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexander Limi wrote:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 03:45:56 -0700, Wichert Akkerman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Members folder gets created even though it's turned off?
Bug, should be fixed.
Still present.
i
Alexander Limi wrote:
On Mon, 09 Apr 2007 11:32:25 -0700, Rob Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexander Limi wrote:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 03:45:56 -0700, Wichert Akkerman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Members folder gets created even though it's turned off?
Bug, should be fixed.
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 12:47:35 -0700, whit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alec Mitchell wrote:
I don't see why this should be considered any better/worse than the
content add menu which uses the exact same links and will be shown on
all such pages as well. From a spiders point of view, it's not
On 24. mar. 2007, at 00.13, Alec Mitchell wrote:
It's a fundamental HTML form issue. No matter what the name of the
field (e.g. even if it has a ':boolean'), if the checkbox is not
checked then the input is not included in the request (so the value
won't be changed). It may be possible to
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 13:03:58 +0100, Wichert Akkerman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Can the old-style Add-on products support TITLE.txt to match
the new style products' ability to have a friendly name?
What does this mean?
It means people need to get of their ass and switch
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 14:40:46 -0700, Geir Bækholt · Plone Solutions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23. mar. 2007, at 13.03, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Who removed JS from checkboxes when?
I did that, it worked correctly for me (and the old javascript did not
work with in-place edit iirc). I
It's a fundamental HTML form issue. No matter what the name of the
field (e.g. even if it has a ':boolean'), if the checkbox is not
checked then the input is not included in the request (so the value
won't be changed). It may be possible to use a hidden field with a
False value, so that
