On 05.07.2004 21:12, Tim Larson wrote:
I agree that leaving out fd:case was a mistake, but I am not sure how to make it better without breaking existing forms. If we add and require fd:case it would be clearer and help avoid errors and misunderstandings, but it would break any forms that are already using "union" widgets.
It would be easy to add a fd:case, just copy or extend the "struct" widget, because they both act the same, or at least pretty close.
Why do you need to force the people to use fd:case? Just adding fd:case should not break anything. It should behave the same way as with my problem of missing fb:case last week.
We would not have to force its use, but if it were required it would help make some programming errors easier to spot and fix. But, I guess just adding and documenting fd:case, without actually requiring it would be best for now. We can add it to the examples and change the docs to only show union with case's and not show the single widget or struct "hacks".
+1 But I want to/must reduce my time for Cocoon for the next months, so I won't attack it.
Joerg
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
