On 05.07.2004 12:35, Vilya Harvey wrote:
The solution (hoping that Tim also reads it):
The implicite cases are really hard to understand, especially as there is
fb:case and ft:case, but no fd:case. The fd:struct I use also has effect on the
template and binding (I have to add them there too to get the same tree) and
complicates them unnecessarily. Why don't we simply introduce explicite fd:case
- until we have masks ;-)
WDYT?
If we had fd:case, wouldn't that imply that we'd have to duplicate widget declarations when the same widget appears in more than one case?
Yes, that would imply it, but it is not different than before: the cases are mutually exclusive. To reuse widget declarations there are still fd:class and fd:new.
Sure thing, I'm happy to contribute it. I don't quite have the editing part working yet, but will submit it as soon as I do. How do I go about submitting it?
http://cocoon.apache.org/community/contrib.html http://cocoon.apache.org/2.1/howto/howto-patch.html http://cocoon.apache.org/2.1/howto/howto-bugzilla.html
BTW I also have an extension of the repeater widget which handles pagination, that I'd like to submit.
Looking forward, it would definitely be an interesting contribution.
Joerg
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
