[rkward-devel] optionset docs

[Thomas Friedrichsmeier]

Hi,

On Friday 15 February 2013, meik michalke wrote:
> i have some questions regarding the optionset docs:
> 
> in this portions of the example...
> 
>   <radio id="gender" label="Gender">
>      <optioncolumn label="Male" value="m"/>
>      <optioncolumn label="Female" value="f"/>
>   </radio>
> 
> ... <optioncolumn> would need to be <option> instead, right?

correct! (For a while, <optioncolumn> was named <option>, until I realized 
this had would just add potential for confusion. So I had to do some search-
and-replace - and I replaced a bit too much, apparently).

> and if in the <content> node we also have ...
> 
>   <input id="firstname" label="Given name(s)" size="small">
> 
> ... as well as later on...
> 
>   <optioncolumn id="firstnames" label="Given name(s)"
>     connect="firstname.text">
>   <optioncolumn id="gender" connect="gender.string">
> 
> ... why is the first id different but the second one identical to the id
> from the <content> nodes?

It's ok, technically, but you are right, it's rather inconsistent. 
<optioncolumn>s may have the same id as the properties they are connected 
to(*), or they may have totally different ids. So the second one should be 
changed to "genders".

Regards
Thomas

(*)  Properties inside the contents region actually have a prefix to their 
ids: "setid.contents.firstname.text", etc. Thus if an <optioncolumnn> is given 
the id "firstname", this does not clash with ids inside the contents region. 
Nonetheless, duplicating ids is not recommendable, as it may make things more 
confusing.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/rkward-devel/attachments/20130216/aca9601a/attachment.sig>