Kevin Dangoor wrote: > On 3/14/06, Michele Cella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yep, my idea is different but now I've another idea that's even more > > easier and less obtrusive, we just need to signal what's the form > > that's been validated and put that into for example > > cherrypy.request.validated_form, now when a form or field wants to read > > c.p.input_values or c.p.validation_errors it just checks that it's name > > is the same as the validated form (or better the instance is the same) > > otherwise it should not use those values, no need of a fqf form and > > everyone is happy. ;-) > > Yes, this makes sense... just keep track of what was validated against > and use that when displaying errors. That's a lot more pleasant than > fully qualifying names. >
Just seen this message (ggroups sucks lately). :-( Anyway done at revision 945 That's the commit message: Backward compatible cleanup: - Removed full_qualified_form - Prepare the ground to support display_field_for (coming soon) - Support for required fields in a Form (adds a css class automatically) - Support for more than one form in the same page Hope it's all good, I've stress tested it but it's never enough. display_field_for is ready but will come tomorrow (here), now I'm too tired. ;-) Ciao Michele --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears Trunk" 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/turbogears-trunk -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
