alue of 'default' on
the field.
Am I doing something wrong or is the Object field not behaving as it
should?
--
Daniel Nouri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
Zope3-users mailing list
Zope3-users@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope3-users
On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 17:13 +, Christian Lück wrote:
> Daniel Nouri wrote:
> > Not sure I'm using the Object field right, but this seems odd:
> >
> > >>> from zope.schema import Field, Object
> > >>> from zope.schema.inter
Achim Domma wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I try to understand how to customize the look & feel of my page using
> the new skin/layer implementation of version 3.3. I followed the example
> on
> http://www.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/ComponentArchitecture/SimplifySkinning
> but still don't understand on ho
Currently, when you have a condition on an action, and it is satisfied on
render time, you'll get a button. However, if you click that button and the
condition happens to be false in the subsequent request, the action will not
be executed, with no error message or notice.
Is this intended?
Dani
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Wednesday 20 June 2007 13:55, Daniel Nouri wrote:
>> Isn't it reasonable to expect an action to
>> execute although it's not visible when the form is rendered again?
>
> Nope. For me the condition is a condition of availability and
Roger Ineichen wrote:
>> I need very basic content providers to generate HTML contents
>> from a set of classes, inside pages templates.
>> Is there a huge difference between using views (and
>> "context/@@viewname"
>> syntax) and using content providers (with "provider:providername"
>> syntax),
Hi!
Roger Ineichen wrote:
>>> I do not recommend using views for content that is only
>> used inside a
>>> template. Because "context/@@viewname"
>>> is also traversable as a real view and will probably show up in
>>> google.
>> How would it show up in Google? Google bots don't try
>> arbitra
Hi!
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Monday 16 July 2007 19:32, Daniel Nouri wrote:
>>> I do not recommend using views for content that is only
>>> used inside a template. Because "context/@@viewname"
>>> is also traversable as a real view and will probably sho
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 July 2007 09:42, Daniel Nouri wrote:
>> How exactly is it easier to secure a viewlet over securing a view? The
>> fact that they're traversable doesn't mean that they have to be visible for
>> everyone, does it? Am I missi
Hermann Himmelbauer wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 17. Juli 2007 14:08 schrieb Stephan Richter:
>> On Monday 16 July 2007 19:32, Daniel Nouri wrote:
>>>> I do not recommend using views for content that is only
>>>> used inside a template. Because "context/@@viewname&qu
Hi Roger!
Roger Ineichen wrote:
> If you like a explicit pattern, then calling views in ZPT is
> fine. On the other hand, if you use a viewlet manager,
> the manager can implement conditions and show based on
> rules e.g. session state or login status more or less
> viewlets.
>
> I think best rea
Hi Stephan!
Stephan Richter wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 July 2007 14:28, Daniel Nouri wrote:
>> plone.portlets introduces some two dozen (!) interfaces/concepts on top of
>> viewlets in order to implement the flexibility that it needs. E.g. it
>> introduces an 'avail
IL PROTECTED]
To: Daniel Nouri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wednesday 18 July 2007 07:35, Daniel Nouri wrote:
> You make it sound like the more objects you adapt, the more flexible you
> are. Which is true
Hi Philipp!
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Stephan Richter wrote:
>> Daniel Nouri wrote:
>>> I'm sure that your concepts work nicely for you there. But maybe
>>> they are not the most
>>> practical way to define my kind of page composition u
14 matches
Mail list logo
