More custom field revisions
bbaetz at acm.org
Wed Apr 30 08:06:13 UTC 2003
On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 08:59:22AM +0100, Gervase Markham wrote:
> To summarise, then, there are a few things I really feel I need to
> insist on :-):
> - That it be possible to make a custom field apply, to 1, 2, .... N
Just have an inclusions table
> - That the custom field have an alphanumeric internal name, defined at
> creation time, which is unique to it and is used in form field names and
> anywhere else a unique identifier is required. This would not be the
> display name (although it could be a default for it.)
Why not use an id for form field names? That saves us a name->id lookup,
and is something I've been considering doing for a while.
> - The separation of content from presentation by moving the definition
> of how and where the fields are displayed to the templates.
Right, as far as is possible.
Hopefully this weekend i'll have time to actually read all of this
More information about the developers