nunb <[email protected]> writes:
[...]
>> One major issue is that if isearch box is marked dirty then when the
>> ajax call comes back, it will overwrite any further user input. This is
>> extremely annoying with slow AJAX.
>>
>
> Yes, we had this issue too. Since ours is an internal app the problem
> wasn't too severe. The UI person actually insisted that for most
> users, they would expect to press enter before the ajax went off and
> did it's thing.

That makes sense.

> A version that does things this way is at http://paste.lisp.org/+1U15
> with supporting annotations (but note it suffers from the earlier
> problem of paginated data sets not being properly searched).
>
> I haven't looked at your code yet, but fwiw, in our case moving the
> searchbox to the top was handled by css absolute positioning.

Hehe, a bit too web development-licious for me ;-)

[...]

>> I would like to fix this before tidying up. Maybe the mixin approach is 
>> wrong?
>
> I had intended for this to be fairly easy to derive from if search
> functionality was required; and to be ignored if not. But considering
> the other issues that have been brought up I think it should be folded
> into the gridedit hierarchy somewhere once the stores abstraction
> takes shape. I still think that could be left to an advanced search
> and the simple search should be almost like emacs C-s or vim /-search.

At the moment my version works well as a mixin except for this dirtiness
issue.

Did the original isearch have this dirtiness thing fixed? I guess we
should really just revert our weblocks to the latest non-borked version,
as the isearch is the main feature we want.

[...]


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"weblocks" 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/weblocks?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to