Alberto Valverde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
This has this advantage that you noticed. One of the most interesting
Oops! I meant disadvantage...
This applies inly if submission is done by a well behaving browser, not by a
maliciously crafted script... We need a safer way to know which fields have
been *explicitlly* disabled by the server-side application.
They might be disabled client side as well... The idea is really signaling
that to the server so that it knows. Of course, if a widget has no
"can_be_disabled" attribute or it is false, then it can't be disabled...
Hmmm, I don't think that's a good idea because, for example, maybe a
validation spec states that fields A and B can only be disabled if they're
disabled simultaneously, this means we need to place that logic in a
FormValidator which has access to all fields (or use the state parameter),
not under simple validators.
Can't we do that with existing logic on schemas + "can_be_disabled"? (Take a
look at "RequireIfMissing", for example)
Taking a look at formencode's docs I see these attributes that might shed some
light here:
| Data and other attributes inherited from FormValidator:
|
| validate_partial_form = False
|
| validate_partial_other = None
|
| validate_partial_python = None
Nor the 5 degrees celsius near Plaza Mayor right now... :P
Oh, that we have here as well. ;-) Negative temperatures are not rare in
winter. :-) Of course, here in the South and in some parts of Southeast. In
Northeast people start feeling cold when it's something like 25 celsius
degrees ;-)
--
Jorge Godoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TurboGears" 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?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
