Hi, To try to address all your issues:
- #info not working in forms - yeah, that's a bug/omission in SF; I guess no one had tried inserting tooltips into forms until now. :) - property stuff - it's fine to say something like "a page cannot be considered a country unless it has a population specified"; that's what mandatory fields are for. But what you seem to be arguing for is something like "a page cannot be considered a country unless it has either a population *or* a capital specified". That just seems odd to me, and I can't imagine that there's any corresponding concept in OWL. Unless I'm misunderstanding something. - MographWiki - I wouldn't really say that it's apples to oranges, since one could imagine that "cities" template having actual data fields, and there being a corresponding form; even in that case, though, it would still be useful to have a city page defined with none of that data, since it would still show the various aggregated lists. - "add another" - yeah, it's true that someone could accidentally click on "add another" a bunch of times, and the system should probably ignore all but one blank value; I wouldn't call it a "serious problem", but I guess that's a matter of opinion. -Yaron On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 8:40 PM, John McClure <[email protected]>wrote: > > Whoops - forgot to note, in the case FOR "no-null-call", that a > serious problem comes up with {{{for-template|multiple}}} whenever the > template does NOT contain any mandatory fields. If the user selects > "Add another", but does not "Remove" it before saving the page, then > an empty call is being inserted into the page. Of course, whenever the > page is re-edited, those empty fields are displayed again. I hafta > think that's clearly a bug -- the user in this case had no intention > to create a new instance of the template and its fields, the user > simply forgot to "Remove" it before saving the page. > > Which of course brings back to mind that default values cause problems > detecting when a user has forgotten to "Remove" an empty/unwanted > template repitition, because those fields with defaults automatically > translate into template args.... so I have to conclude that "no- > default-arg" remains important to me, in order to address this highly > understandable "mistake" by the user, while preserving default values > in repeating templates. > > So that's the use case for "no-default-arg" that I'm most concerned -- > if you know how I can otherwise deal with this, that'd be great - > thanks! > > [ok, i'll be quiet now!] > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Semantic Forms" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/semantic-forms?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
