On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 02:55:23PM +, Florent Guillaume wrote:
Jim Penny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also have not found a convention that I am comfortable with on
handling check-boxes and radio buttons in error processing. But I
expect to!
Are you referring to what I call magic
Jim Penny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you referring to what I call magic boolean attributes ?
http://lists.zope.org/pipermail/zpt/2002-March/003013.html
Yes, thanks very much, this is very helpful. I see that you could find
no documentation on this, and got no reply. Is this
Florent Guillaume wrote:
Jim Penny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you referring to what I call magic boolean attributes ?
http://lists.zope.org/pipermail/zpt/2002-March/003013.html
Yes, thanks very much, this is very helpful. I see that you could find
no documentation on this, and got no
Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm pretty sure it's permanent, only undocumented.
Florent, do you have committer privileges? You can certainly check in
documentation of this behavior. You can also add a comment to the Zope
book.
On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 03:32:21PM -0400, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
Jim Penny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you referring to what I call magic boolean attributes ?
http://lists.zope.org/pipermail/zpt/2002-March/003013.html
Yes, thanks very much, this is very
Jim Penny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also have not found a convention that I am comfortable with on
handling check-boxes and radio buttons in error processing. But I
expect to!
Are you referring to what I call magic boolean attributes ?
Tim Hoffman wrote:
In addition event handlers in html ie onClick onBlur etc
are all order independant.
now adding tal: attributes that where order dependant would seem
to fly in the face of that convention. (Admittedely there are probably
no strange dependancies that could be introduced
Jim Penny wrote:
on the surface, to be pretty ugly. I have said that there are three
specific things I dislike about ZPT -- 0) lots of things have changed
spelling again -- request v. REQUEST, here v. context v. container v.
this v. ?
Yeah, there was absolutely no need for this and I
On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 11:53:47AM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
Jim Penny wrote:
on the surface, to be pretty ugly. I have said that there are three
specific things I dislike about ZPT -- 0) lots of things have changed
spelling again -- request v. REQUEST, here v. context v. container
Jim Penny wrote:
...can also be written as:
tal:x repeat=x xes
tr
tdtal:x replace=x/id//td
/tr
/tal:x
Interesting. I seem to remember this from the Wiki's, is it documented
anywhere else? This really seems like Chapter 5 material.
No idea, but it definitely should be...
Jim Penny wrote:
I have also said that, while ZPT is not as warty as DTML, ZPT looks,
on the surface, to be pretty ugly. I have said that there are three
specific things I dislike about ZPT -- 0) lots of things have changed
spelling again -- request v. REQUEST, here v. context v. container
11 matches
Mail list logo
