On 11/28/05, Michele Cella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Kevin Dangoor wrote: > > It's an interesting point, though. It may be possible, with a little > > API smoothing, to make *all widgets* usable in places where you'd > > currently have to use a form. If that sounds good to people, it's > > worth opening a ticket on... opinions? > > > > Last week I've made a small syntax highlighter widget just for fun :-) > but I haven't put it inside a form and I couldn't see it from my tg app > but only from the widget browser, can this be the reason? If so, that's > not what I was expecting.
Yes, that is likely the reason. The JavaScript was not getting included. The widget browser includes all of the JavaScript. > If I understand it right you have designed widget with the idea that > they should all be included inside a form, but the system you have made > is so nice that I would like to use them also for other purposes. > > IMHO there should be a clear distinction between form/form fields > widget and other widgets that don't require a form (and hence a > validator) like Ronald grid widget, syntax highlighter and so on. Here's the good bit: I *think* that a bit of code shuffling with possibly minor API tweaks will eliminate the need for a distinction. If a widget has useful application in a form, you can use it that way. If it's useful outside a form, you can use it that way. Seems doable and would make things cleaner. > I'm sure I'm getting something wrong, sorry. Nope... it's just the API that is a bit confusing when it need not be. Kevin
