Re: [Webware-discuss] Fun with forms

Matt Feifarek wrote: > On Jan 20, 2008 8:33 PM, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > The option no one seems to consider, but which I continue to advocate, > is using FormEncode with htmlfill and ad hoc templates to generate the > actual HTML forms (

Re: [Webware-discuss] Fun with forms

On Jan 20, 2008 8:33 PM, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The option no one seems to consider, but which I continue to advocate, > is using FormEncode with htmlfill and ad hoc templates to generate the > actual HTML forms (because once you take out the value filling, error > filling, and v

Re: [Webware-discuss] Fun with forms

Matt Feifarek wrote: > On Jan 4, 2008 6:55 PM, Mark Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > > FormKit is not really actively maintained either. > > Is this sort of thing passe at this point? What approach is up to date? > > > As one of the two authors o

Re: [Webware-discuss] Fun with forms

On Jan 18, 2008, at 6:44 AM, Matt Feifarek wrote: > I don't know that it's passe, we are still using it extensively on > past (running) projects. In the present and the future, I have > invested time using ToscaWidgets with FormEncode in Pylons. Thanks for the comment, Matt. It helps me in m

Re: [Webware-discuss] Fun with forms

On Jan 4, 2008 6:55 PM, Mark Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > FormKit is not really actively maintained either. > > Is this sort of thing passe at this point? What approach is up to date? > As one of the two authors of FK, I can confirm this. I don't know that it's passe, we are still u

Re: [Webware-discuss] Fun with forms

Mark Phillips wrote: > On Jan 4, 2008, at 8:13 AM, Christoph Zwerschke wrote: > >> Please note that FunFormKit is somewhat outdated and not maintained >> any >> more - has been superseeded with FormEncode which is not a Webware >> plug-in but of course you can also use it with Webware. > [snip]

Re: [Webware-discuss] Fun with forms

On Jan 4, 2008, at 8:13 AM, Christoph Zwerschke wrote: > Please note that FunFormKit is somewhat outdated and not maintained > any > more - has been superseeded with FormEncode which is not a Webware > plug-in but of course you can also use it with Webware. [snip] > FormKit is not really active

Re: [Webware-discuss] Fun with forms

Mark Phillips wrote: > So to exercise a plug-in, I need to set up a context that includes > files that sub-class a plug? Depends on what the plug-in provides. FunFormKit provides stuff for form generation and validation, plus a mixin-class for WebKit servlets: http://funformkit.sourceforge.net

Re: [Webware-discuss] Fun with forms

On Jan 4, 2008, at 12:15 AM, Christoph Zwerschke wrote: > I think you are confusing Plug-Ins and Contexts. KidKit and FunFormKit > are both examples of Webware Plug-Ins. They are usually installed > directly in the Webware directory, at the same level as the "WebKit" > directory (you can control w

Re: [Webware-discuss] Fun with forms

Mark Phillips wrote: > I am, at long last, playing around with using Webware for html pages > that are information submission forms. I would like to create a dozen > or so information request forms that are validated before being > accepted. > > I can see that KidKit is loaded but I don't se

[Webware-discuss] Fun with forms

I am, at long last, playing around with using Webware for html pages that are information submission forms. I would like to create a dozen or so information request forms that are validated before being accepted. I can see that KidKit is loaded but I don't see how to invoke its examples. I