Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Locked
12
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
12
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
 
|
Hi Jacques, Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not check these ones). Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedCommentId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 Gil Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34,
[hidden email] a écrit :
Author: jleroux Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 New Revision: 1761687 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev Log: Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications (OFBIZ-8110) There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label could have sufficed. As examples you can take: * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. Thanks: Pierre Smits Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687&r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff ============================================================================== --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original) +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. <field name="originalPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text-find/></field> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"><text-find/></field> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> </form> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. <text/> </field> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text/></field> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> <field name="securityGroupId" > <drop-down allow-empty="true"> |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz Demo
implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use {code}<auto-fields-entity entity-name="EntityName" default-field-type="XXXX" />{code} as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms. Unfortunately that doesn't work for all. Furthermore, like I said in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501193 A specific title applied processes faster than none applied. Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when one takes the context into consideration. E.g. CommonProduct vs AccountingProduct ManufacturingProduct OrderProduct WorkEffortProduct PartyProduct FormFieldTitle_Product ScrumProduct EtcProduct Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne < [hidden email]> wrote: > Hi Jacques, > Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: > http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 > > I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F > ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not > check these ones). > > Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm > entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. > issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 > > Gil > > Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : > > Author: jleroux > Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 > New Revision: 1761687 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev > Log: > Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications > (OFBIZ-8110) > > There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field > definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label > could have sufficed. > > As examples you can take: > * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) > * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) > > This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks > to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the > CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. > > Thanks: Pierre Smits > > Modified: > ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml > > Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687&r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original) > +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. > <field name="originalPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> > <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text-find/></field> > <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> > - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> > + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"><text-find/></field> > <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> > <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> > </form> > @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. > <text/> > </field> > <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> > - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> > - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> > + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text/></field> > + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> > <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> > <field name="securityGroupId" > > <drop-down allow-empty="true"> > > > > > |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
In reply to this post by Gil Portenseigne
I'd suggest to revert this commit.
Thanks, Michael Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne: > > Hi Jacques, > > Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: > http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 > > I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and > FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did > not check these ones). > > Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedCommentId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 > > Gil > > Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >> Author: jleroux >> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >> New Revision: 1761687 >> >> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >> Log: >> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications >> (OFBIZ-8110) >> >> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field >> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label >> could have sufficed. >> >> As examples you can take: >> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) >> >> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks >> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the >> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >> >> Thanks: Pierre Smits >> >> Modified: >> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >> >> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687&r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >> ============================================================================== >> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original) >> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >> <field name="originalPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> >> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >> </form> >> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >> <text/> >> </field> >> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> >> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text/></field> >> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >> <field name="securityGroupId" > >> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >> >> > |
smime.p7s (5K)
|
I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future
then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention then we should remove the related code accordingly. On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl <[hidden email]> wrote: > I'd suggest to revert this commit. > > Thanks, > > Michael > > Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne: > >> >> Hi Jacques, >> >> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: >> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 >> >> I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and >> FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not >> check these ones). >> >> >> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm >> entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. >> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 >> >> Gil >> >> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >> >>> Author: jleroux >>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>> New Revision: 1761687 >>> >>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >>> Log: >>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various >>> applications >>> (OFBIZ-8110) >>> >>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these >>> field >>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared >>> (common) label >>> could have sufficed. >>> >>> As examples you can take: >>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) >>> >>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as >>> sub tasks >>> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the >>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >>> >>> Thanks: Pierre Smits >>> >>> Modified: >>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>> >>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ >>> myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687 >>> &r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >>> ============================================================ >>> ================== >>> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>> (original) >>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed >>> Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >>> <field name="originalPortalPageId" >>> position="2"><text-find/></field> >>> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>> }"><text-find/></field> >>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></fie >>> ld> >>> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc >>> ription}"><text-find/></field> >>> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" >>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >>> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" >>> widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >>> </form> >>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >>> <text/> >>> </field> >>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> >>> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >>> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>> }"><text/></field> >>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" >>> position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >>> <field name="securityGroupId" > >>> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >>> >>> >>> >> > > |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
In reply to this post by Pierre Smits
Hi Pierre, I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer (and i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to be smartly lazy :) ). The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields allow speed developpment and is far more readable than having title="uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonXXXXX" everywhere in your form file... And if you want to overload this label its very easy. I don't see the problem here. inline Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a
écrit :
How much ? For display i guess it's not significant.Labels for products or others object could be different in each component, thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXXAlso, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when one takes the context into consideration. Regards, Gil E.g. CommonProduct vs AccountingProduct ManufacturingProduct OrderProduct WorkEffortProduct PartyProduct FormFieldTitle_Product ScrumProduct EtcProduct Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne < [hidden email]> wrote:Hi Jacques, Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not check these ones). Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 Gil Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : Author: jleroux Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 New Revision: 1761687 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev Log: Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications (OFBIZ-8110) There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label could have sufficed. As examples you can take: * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. Thanks: Pierre Smits Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687&r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff ============================================================================== --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original) +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. <field name="originalPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text-find/></field> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"><text-find/></field> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> </form> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. <text/> </field> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text/></field> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> <field name="securityGroupId" > <drop-down allow-empty="true"> |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
Hi Gil,
Am 21.09.16 um 11:25 schrieb gil portenseigne: > Labels for products or others object could be different in each > component, thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX I agree, this would be an unwanted regression. Regards, Michael |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
In reply to this post by Gil Portenseigne
HI Gil,
Where do you see "uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonXXXXX" in widgets and templates? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. But in each (most?) component you'll find {code}<property-map resource="CommonUiLabels" map-name="uiLabelMap" global= "true"/> {code} And for what it is worth: a product in manufacturing, accounting, party, workeffort or any other component referencing a product from the product component is a product. No difference in context. Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:25 AM, gil portenseigne < [hidden email]> wrote: > Hi Pierre, > > I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer (and > i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to be sma > rtly lazy :) ). > > The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields allow > speed developpment and is far more readable than having > title="uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonXXXXX" everywhere in your form > file... And if you want to overload this label its very easy. I don't see > the problem here. > > inline > Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit : > > FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz Demo > implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use > {code}<auto-fields-entity entity-name="EntityName" default-field-type="XXXX" > />{code} > as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms. > > Unfortunately that doesn't work for all. > > Furthermore, like I said inhttps://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501193 > A specific title applied processes faster than none applied. > > How much ? For display i guess it's not significant. > > > Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when one > takes the context into consideration. > > Labels for products or others object could be different in each component, > thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX > > Regards, > > Gil > > > E.g. > > CommonProduct > > vs > > AccountingProduct > > ManufacturingProduct > > OrderProduct > > WorkEffortProduct > PartyProduct > > FormFieldTitle_Product > > ScrumProduct > > EtcProduct > > > Best regards, > > Pierre Smits > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> <http://www.orrtiz.com> > > OFBiz based solutions & services > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > Hi Jacques, > Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 > > I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F > ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not > check these ones). > > Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm > entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. > issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 > > Gil > > Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : > > Author: jleroux > Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 > New Revision: 1761687 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev > Log: > Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications > (OFBIZ-8110) > > There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field > definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label > could have sufficed. > > As examples you can take: > * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) > * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) > > This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks > to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the > CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. > > Thanks: Pierre Smits > > Modified: > ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml > > Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687&r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original) > +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. > <field name="originalPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> > <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text-find/></field> > <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> > - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> > + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"><text-find/></field> > <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> > <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> > </form> > @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. > <text/> > </field> > <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> > - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> > - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> > + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text/></field> > + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> > <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> > <field name="securityGroupId" > > <drop-down allow-empty="true"> > > > > > > > > |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
In the commit for instance :
title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" the MyComponent/Common explain both possible cases... Le 21/09/2016 à 11:52, Pierre Smits a écrit : > HI Gil, > > Where do you see "uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonXXXXX" in widgets and > templates? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. But in each (most?) component > you'll find > {code}<property-map resource="CommonUiLabels" map-name="uiLabelMap" global= > "true"/> > {code} > > And for what it is worth: a product in manufacturing, accounting, party, > workeffort or any other component referencing a product from the product > component is a product. No difference in context. > > Best regards, > > Pierre Smits > > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> > OFBiz based solutions & services > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:25 AM, gil portenseigne < > [hidden email]> wrote: > >> Hi Pierre, >> >> I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer (and >> i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to be sma >> rtly lazy :) ). >> >> The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields allow >> speed developpment and is far more readable than having >> title="uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonXXXXX" everywhere in your form >> file... And if you want to overload this label its very easy. I don't see >> the problem here. >> >> inline >> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit : >> >> FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz Demo >> implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use >> {code}<auto-fields-entity entity-name="EntityName" default-field-type="XXXX" >> />{code} >> as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms. >> >> Unfortunately that doesn't work for all. >> >> Furthermore, like I said inhttps://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501193 >> A specific title applied processes faster than none applied. >> >> How much ? For display i guess it's not significant. >> >> >> Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when one >> takes the context into consideration. >> >> Labels for products or others object could be different in each component, >> thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX >> >> Regards, >> >> Gil >> >> >> E.g. >> >> CommonProduct >> >> vs >> >> AccountingProduct >> >> ManufacturingProduct >> >> OrderProduct >> >> WorkEffortProduct >> PartyProduct >> >> FormFieldTitle_Product >> >> ScrumProduct >> >> EtcProduct >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> Pierre Smits >> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> <http://www.orrtiz.com> >> >> OFBiz based solutions & services >> >> OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ >> >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> >> Hi Jacques, >> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 >> >> I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F >> ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not >> check these ones). >> >> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm >> entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. >> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 >> >> Gil >> >> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >> >> Author: jleroux >> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >> New Revision: 1761687 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >> Log: >> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications >> (OFBIZ-8110) >> >> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field >> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label >> could have sufficed. >> >> As examples you can take: >> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) >> >> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks >> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the >> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >> >> Thanks: Pierre Smits >> >> Modified: >> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >> >> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687&r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >> ============================================================================== >> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original) >> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >> <field name="originalPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> >> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >> </form> >> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >> <text/> >> </field> >> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> >> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text/></field> >> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >> <field name="securityGroupId" > >> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
No it doesn't. In fact it is completely off. Because the inclusion of the
component name (MyComponent, in your reference) is nowhere required. Unless I am misunderstanding you. Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:59 AM, gil portenseigne < [hidden email]> wrote: > In the commit for instance : > > title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" > > the MyComponent/Common explain both possible cases... > > Le 21/09/2016 à 11:52, Pierre Smits a écrit : > >> HI Gil, >> >> Where do you see "uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonXXXXX" in widgets and >> templates? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. But in each (most?) component >> you'll find >> {code}<property-map resource="CommonUiLabels" map-name="uiLabelMap" >> global= >> "true"/> >> {code} >> >> And for what it is worth: a product in manufacturing, accounting, party, >> workeffort or any other component referencing a product from the product >> component is a product. No difference in context. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Pierre Smits >> >> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> >> OFBiz based solutions & services >> >> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace >> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ >> >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:25 AM, gil portenseigne < >> [hidden email]> wrote: >> >> Hi Pierre, >>> >>> I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer (and >>> i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to be >>> sma >>> rtly lazy :) ). >>> >>> The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields >>> allow >>> speed developpment and is far more readable than having >>> title="uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonXXXXX" everywhere in your form >>> file... And if you want to overload this label its very easy. I don't see >>> the problem here. >>> >>> inline >>> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit : >>> >>> FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz >>> Demo >>> implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use >>> {code}<auto-fields-entity entity-name="EntityName" >>> default-field-type="XXXX" >>> />{code} >>> as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms. >>> >>> Unfortunately that doesn't work for all. >>> >>> Furthermore, like I said inhttps://issues.apache.org/ji >>> ra/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193&page=com. >>> atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment- >>> tabpanel#comment-15501193 >>> A specific title applied processes faster than none applied. >>> >>> How much ? For display i guess it's not significant. >>> >>> >>> Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when >>> one >>> takes the context into consideration. >>> >>> Labels for products or others object could be different in each >>> component, >>> thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Gil >>> >>> >>> E.g. >>> >>> CommonProduct >>> >>> vs >>> >>> AccountingProduct >>> >>> ManufacturingProduct >>> >>> OrderProduct >>> >>> WorkEffortProduct >>> PartyProduct >>> >>> FormFieldTitle_Product >>> >>> ScrumProduct >>> >>> EtcProduct >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Pierre Smits >>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> <http://www.orrtiz.com> >>> >>> OFBiz based solutions & services >>> >>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne < >>> [hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Hi Jacques, >>> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: >>> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 >>> >>> I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F >>> ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not >>> check these ones). >>> >>> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm >>> entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. >>> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 >>> >>> Gil >>> >>> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >>> >>> Author: jleroux >>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>> New Revision: 1761687 >>> >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >>> Log: >>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various >>> applications >>> (OFBIZ-8110) >>> >>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these >>> field >>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared >>> (common) label >>> could have sufficed. >>> >>> As examples you can take: >>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) >>> >>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as >>> sub tasks >>> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the >>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >>> >>> Thanks: Pierre Smits >>> >>> Modified: >>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>> >>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/mypo >>> rtal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687&r1=1761686&r2= >>> 1761687&view=diff >>> ============================================================ >>> ================== >>> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>> (original) >>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed >>> Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >>> <field name="originalPortalPageId" >>> position="2"><text-find/></field> >>> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>> }"><text-find/></field> >>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></fie >>> ld> >>> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc >>> ription}"><text-find/></field> >>> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" >>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >>> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" >>> widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >>> </form> >>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >>> <text/> >>> </field> >>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> >>> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >>> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>> }"><text/></field> >>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" >>> position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >>> <field name="securityGroupId" > >>> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
Yes i did express myself bad
:), it was not a
point i wanted to insist on.
Sorry for the distraction. Le 21/09/2016 à 12:16, Pierre Smits a
écrit :
No it doesn't. In fact it is completely off. Because the inclusion of the component name (MyComponent, in your reference) is nowhere required. Unless I am misunderstanding you. Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:59 AM, gil portenseigne < [hidden email]> wrote: |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
So what is the point you're trying to make?
Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:18 PM, gil portenseigne < [hidden email]> wrote: > Yes i did express myself bad :), it was not a point i wanted to insist on. > Sorry for the distraction. > > Le 21/09/2016 à 12:16, Pierre Smits a écrit : > > No it doesn't. In fact it is completely off. Because the inclusion of the > component name (MyComponent, in your reference) is nowhere required. > > Unless I am misunderstanding you. > > Best regards, > > > Pierre Smits > > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> <http://www.orrtiz.com> > OFBiz based solutions & services > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:59 AM, gil portenseigne <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > In the commit for instance : > > title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" > > the MyComponent/Common explain both possible cases... > > Le 21/09/2016 à 11:52, Pierre Smits a écrit : > > > HI Gil, > > Where do you see "uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonXXXXX" in widgets and > templates? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. But in each (most?) component > you'll find > {code}<property-map resource="CommonUiLabels" map-name="uiLabelMap" > global= > "true"/> > {code} > > And for what it is worth: a product in manufacturing, accounting, party, > workeffort or any other component referencing a product from the product > component is a product. No difference in context. > > Best regards, > > Pierre Smits > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> <http://www.orrtiz.com> > OFBiz based solutions & services > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:25 AM, gil portenseigne <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi Pierre, > > > I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer (and > i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to be > sma > rtly lazy :) ). > > The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields > allow > speed developpment and is far more readable than having > title="uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonXXXXX" everywhere in your form > file... And if you want to overload this label its very easy. I don't see > the problem here. > > inline > Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit : > > FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz > Demo > implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use > {code}<auto-fields-entity entity-name="EntityName" > default-field-type="XXXX" > />{code} > as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms. > > Unfortunately that doesn't work for all. > > Furthermore, like I said inhttps://issues.apache.org/ji > ra/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193&page=com <http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193&page=com>. > atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment- > tabpanel#comment-15501193 > A specific title applied processes faster than none applied. > > How much ? For display i guess it's not significant. > > > Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when > one > takes the context into consideration. > > Labels for products or others object could be different in each > component, > thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX > > Regards, > > Gil > > > E.g. > > CommonProduct > > vs > > AccountingProduct > > ManufacturingProduct > > OrderProduct > > WorkEffortProduct > PartyProduct > > FormFieldTitle_Product > > ScrumProduct > > EtcProduct > > > Best regards, > > Pierre SmitsORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> <http://www.orrtiz.com> <http://www.orrtiz.com> <http://www.orrtiz.com> > > OFBiz based solutions & services > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplacehttp://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > Hi Jacques, > Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer:http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 > > I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F > ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not > check these ones). > > Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA :https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm > entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. > issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 > > Gil > > Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : > > Author: jleroux > Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 > New Revision: 1761687 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev > Log: > Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various > applications > (OFBIZ-8110) > > There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these > field > definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared > (common) label > could have sufficed. > > As examples you can take: > * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) > * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) > > This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as > sub tasks > to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the > CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. > > Thanks: Pierre Smits > > Modified: > ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml > > Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/ > PortalAdmForms.xml > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/mypo > rtal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687&r1=1761686&r2= > 1761687&view=diff > ============================================================ > ================== > --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml > (original) > +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed > Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. > <field name="originalPortalPageId" > position="2"><text-find/></field> > <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName > }"><text-find/></field> > <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></fie > ld> > - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> > + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc > ription}"><text-find/></field> > <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" > title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> > <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" > widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> > </form> > @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. > <text/> > </field> > <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> > - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> > - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> > + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName > }"><text/></field> > + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" > position="2"><text size="60"/></field> > <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> > <field name="securityGroupId" > > <drop-down allow-empty="true"> > > > > > > > > > > > > |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Gil Portenseigne
This is a moot point, ask Christian :)
Jacques Le 21/09/2016 à 09:47, gil portenseigne a écrit : > > Hi Jacques, > > Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 > > I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not > check these ones). > > Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedCommentId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 > > Gil > > Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >> Author: jleroux >> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >> New Revision: 1761687 >> >> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >> Log: >> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications >> (OFBIZ-8110) >> >> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field >> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label >> could have sufficed. >> >> As examples you can take: >> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) >> >> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks >> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the >> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >> >> Thanks: Pierre Smits >> >> Modified: >> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >> >> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687&r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >> ============================================================================== >> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original) >> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >> <field name="originalPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> >> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >> </form> >> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >> <text/> >> </field> >> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> >> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text/></field> >> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >> <field name="securityGroupId" > >> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >> >> > |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Pierre Smits
I don't think the performance argument is solid here
But the FormFieldTitle_ thing is questionnable, yes. Even if I must say I missed this point when I committed this in my haste to close OFBIZ-8110. I'm actually slightly for FormFieldTitle_s, though it's maybe blurring things a bit, really a moot point to me. Jacques Le 21/09/2016 à 11:03, Pierre Smits a écrit : > FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz Demo > implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use > {code}<auto-fields-entity entity-name="EntityName" default-field-type="XXXX" > />{code} > as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms. > > Unfortunately that doesn't work for all. > > Furthermore, like I said in > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8121?focusedCommentId=15501193&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501193 > A specific title applied processes faster than none applied. > > Also, applying specific labels reduces the total number of labels, when one > takes the context into consideration. > E.g. > > CommonProduct > > vs > > AccountingProduct > > ManufacturingProduct > > OrderProduct > > WorkEffortProduct > PartyProduct > > FormFieldTitle_Product > > ScrumProduct > > EtcProduct > > > Best regards, > > Pierre Smits > > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> > OFBiz based solutions & services > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, gil portenseigne < > [hidden email]> wrote: > >> Hi Jacques, >> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: >> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 >> >> I do not understand these kind of improvements. Adding a title when and F >> ormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not >> check these ones). >> >> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm >> entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. >> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 >> >> Gil >> >> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >> >> Author: jleroux >> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >> New Revision: 1761687 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >> Log: >> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various applications >> (OFBIZ-8110) >> >> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these field >> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared (common) label >> could have sufficed. >> >> As examples you can take: >> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) >> >> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as sub tasks >> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the >> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >> >> Thanks: Pierre Smits >> >> Modified: >> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >> >> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687&r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >> ============================================================================== >> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml (original) >> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >> <field name="originalPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></field> >> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >> </form> >> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >> <text/> >> </field> >> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> >> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName}"><text/></field> >> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >> <field name="securityGroupId" > >> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >> >> >> >> >> |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by taher
I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D)
Jacques Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : > I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future > then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration > for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention then > we should remove the related code accordingly. > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl <[hidden email]> > wrote: > >> I'd suggest to revert this commit. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Michael >> >> Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne: >> >>> Hi Jacques, >>> >>> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: >>> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 >>> >>> I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and >>> FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not >>> check these ones). >>> >>> >>> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm >>> entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. >>> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 >>> >>> Gil >>> >>> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >>> >>>> Author: jleroux >>>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>> New Revision: 1761687 >>>> >>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >>>> Log: >>>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various >>>> applications >>>> (OFBIZ-8110) >>>> >>>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these >>>> field >>>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared >>>> (common) label >>>> could have sufficed. >>>> >>>> As examples you can take: >>>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >>>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) >>>> >>>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as >>>> sub tasks >>>> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the >>>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >>>> >>>> Thanks: Pierre Smits >>>> >>>> Modified: >>>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>> >>>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ >>>> myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687 >>>> &r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >>>> ============================================================ >>>> ================== >>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>> (original) >>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed >>>> Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >>>> <field name="originalPortalPageId" >>>> position="2"><text-find/></field> >>>> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>> }"><text-find/></field> >>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></fie >>>> ld> >>>> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc >>>> ription}"><text-find/></field> >>>> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" >>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >>>> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" >>>> widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >>>> </form> >>>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >>>> <text/> >>>> </field> >>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> >>>> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >>>> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>>> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>> }"><text/></field> >>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" >>>> position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>>> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >>>> <field name="securityGroupId" > >>>> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
Jacques,
please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history cleaner. Thanks, Michael Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux: > I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help > yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D) > > Jacques > > > Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : >> I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the >> future >> then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration >> for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention >> then >> we should remove the related code accordingly. >> >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl >> <[hidden email]> >> wrote: >> >>> I'd suggest to revert this commit. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Michael >>> >>> Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne: >>> >>>> Hi Jacques, >>>> >>>> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: >>>> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 >>>> >>>> I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and >>>> FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i >>>> did not >>>> check these ones). >>>> >>>> >>>> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm >>>> entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. >>>> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 >>>> >>>> Gil >>>> >>>> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >>>> >>>>> Author: jleroux >>>>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>> New Revision: 1761687 >>>>> >>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >>>>> Log: >>>>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various >>>>> applications >>>>> (OFBIZ-8110) >>>>> >>>>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often >>>>> these >>>>> field >>>>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared >>>>> (common) label >>>>> could have sufficed. >>>>> >>>>> As examples you can take: >>>>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >>>>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could >>>>> be used) >>>>> >>>>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable >>>>> issues as >>>>> sub tasks >>>>> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels >>>>> in the >>>>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks: Pierre Smits >>>>> >>>>> Modified: >>>>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>> >>>>> Modified: >>>>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ >>>>> myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687 >>>>> &r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >>>>> ============================================================ >>>>> ================== >>>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>> (original) >>>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed >>>>> Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >>>>> <field name="originalPortalPageId" >>>>> position="2"><text-find/></field> >>>>> <field name="portalPageName" >>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>> }"><text-find/></field> >>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" >>>>> position="2"><text-find/></fie >>>>> ld> >>>>> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >>>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc >>>>> ription}"><text-find/></field> >>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" >>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >>>>> <field name="searchButton" >>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" >>>>> widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >>>>> </form> >>>>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >>>>> <text/> >>>>> </field> >>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" >>>>> position="2"><text/></field> >>>>> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >>>>> - <field name="description" position="2"><text >>>>> size="60"/></field> >>>>> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>> }"><text/></field> >>>>> + <field name="description" >>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" >>>>> position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>>>> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" > >>>>> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> > |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
Administrator
|
I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that everybody agree about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature
So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment to raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this discussion back in the limbo Jacques Le 21/09/2016 à 16:04, Michael Brohl a écrit : > Jacques, > > please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history cleaner. > > Thanks, > > Michael > > > Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux: >> I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D) >> >> Jacques >> >> >> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : >>> I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future >>> then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration >>> for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention then >>> we should remove the related code accordingly. >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl <[hidden email]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I'd suggest to revert this commit. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Michael >>>> >>>> Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne: >>>> >>>>> Hi Jacques, >>>>> >>>>> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: >>>>> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 >>>>> >>>>> I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and >>>>> FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not >>>>> check these ones). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm >>>>> entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. >>>>> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 >>>>> >>>>> Gil >>>>> >>>>> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >>>>> >>>>>> Author: jleroux >>>>>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>>> New Revision: 1761687 >>>>>> >>>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >>>>>> Log: >>>>>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various >>>>>> applications >>>>>> (OFBIZ-8110) >>>>>> >>>>>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these >>>>>> field >>>>>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared >>>>>> (common) label >>>>>> could have sufficed. >>>>>> >>>>>> As examples you can take: >>>>>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >>>>>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) >>>>>> >>>>>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as >>>>>> sub tasks >>>>>> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the >>>>>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks: Pierre Smits >>>>>> >>>>>> Modified: >>>>>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>> >>>>>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ >>>>>> myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687 >>>>>> &r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >>>>>> ============================================================ >>>>>> ================== >>>>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>> (original) >>>>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed >>>>>> Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >>>>>> <field name="originalPortalPageId" >>>>>> position="2"><text-find/></field> >>>>>> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>>> }"><text-find/></field> >>>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></fie >>>>>> ld> >>>>>> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >>>>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc >>>>>> ription}"><text-find/></field> >>>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" >>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >>>>>> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" >>>>>> widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >>>>>> </form> >>>>>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >>>>>> <text/> >>>>>> </field> >>>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> >>>>>> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >>>>>> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>>>>> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>>> }"><text/></field> >>>>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" >>>>>> position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>>>>> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >>>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" > >>>>>> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> > > |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
Nice that you're trying to keep this alive, Jacques. But there is basically
nothing to discuss as it is a done deal. Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 5:45 PM, Jacques Le Roux < [hidden email]> wrote: > I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that everybody > agree about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature > > So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment to > raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this discussion > back in the limbo > > Jacques > > > > Le 21/09/2016 à 16:04, Michael Brohl a écrit : > >> Jacques, >> >> please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history cleaner. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Michael >> >> >> Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux: >> >>> I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help >>> yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D) >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> >>> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : >>> >>>> I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the >>>> future >>>> then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration >>>> for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention >>>> then >>>> we should remove the related code accordingly. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl < >>>> [hidden email]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'd suggest to revert this commit. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Jacques, >>>>>> >>>>>> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: >>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 >>>>>> >>>>>> I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and >>>>>> FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did >>>>>> not >>>>>> check these ones). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm >>>>>> entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. >>>>>> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 >>>>>> >>>>>> Gil >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >>>>>> >>>>>> Author: jleroux >>>>>>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>>>> New Revision: 1761687 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >>>>>>> Log: >>>>>>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various >>>>>>> applications >>>>>>> (OFBIZ-8110) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often >>>>>>> these >>>>>>> field >>>>>>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared >>>>>>> (common) label >>>>>>> could have sufficed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As examples you can take: >>>>>>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >>>>>>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be >>>>>>> used) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues >>>>>>> as >>>>>>> sub tasks >>>>>>> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks: Pierre Smits >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms. >>>>>>> xml >>>>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ >>>>>>> myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687 >>>>>>> &r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >>>>>>> ============================================================ >>>>>>> ================== >>>>>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>> (original) >>>>>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>> Wed >>>>>>> Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >>>>>>> <field name="originalPortalPageId" >>>>>>> position="2"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="portalPageName" >>>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>>>> }"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" >>>>>>> position="2"><text-find/></fie >>>>>>> ld> >>>>>>> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc >>>>>>> ription}"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" >>>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind >>>>>>> }" >>>>>>> widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >>>>>>> </form> >>>>>>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >>>>>>> <text/> >>>>>>> </field> >>>>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" >>>>>>> position="2"><text/></field> >>>>>>> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >>>>>>> - <field name="description" position="2"><text >>>>>>> size="60"/></field> >>>>>>> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>>>> }"><text/></field> >>>>>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc >>>>>>> ription}" >>>>>>> position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" > >>>>>>> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> >> > |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
|
In reply to this post by Jacques Le Roux
I see no improvement to use a dedicate title as same the FormFieldTitle.
More a form is light, more is readable and maintainable. Yes I'm lazy, and it's good for my healthy :) If we change or improve the engine for the label, all specific use would be manage direclty. On the other way, if you want surcharge the label, you can do on your component, or/and surcharge the form with the specific label. Nicolas Le 21/09/2016 à 17:45, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : > I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that > everybody agree about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature > > So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment to > raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this > discussion back in the limbo > > Jacques > > > Le 21/09/2016 à 16:04, Michael Brohl a écrit : >> Jacques, >> >> please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history >> cleaner. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Michael >> >> >> Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux: >>> I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help >>> yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D) >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> >>> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : >>>> I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the >>>> future >>>> then we must take a decision to stop using >>>> convention-over-configuration >>>> for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that >>>> convention then >>>> we should remove the related code accordingly. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl >>>> <[hidden email]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'd suggest to revert this commit. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> >>>>> Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Jacques, >>>>>> >>>>>> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: >>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 >>>>>> >>>>>> I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title >>>>>> when and >>>>>> FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i >>>>>> did not >>>>>> check these ones). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm >>>>>> entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. >>>>>> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 >>>>>> >>>>>> Gil >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >>>>>> >>>>>>> Author: jleroux >>>>>>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>>>> New Revision: 1761687 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >>>>>>> Log: >>>>>>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various >>>>>>> applications >>>>>>> (OFBIZ-8110) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. >>>>>>> Often these >>>>>>> field >>>>>>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared >>>>>>> (common) label >>>>>>> could have sufficed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As examples you can take: >>>>>>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be >>>>>>> used) >>>>>>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could >>>>>>> be used) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable >>>>>>> issues as >>>>>>> sub tasks >>>>>>> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels >>>>>>> in the >>>>>>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks: Pierre Smits >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ >>>>>>> myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687 >>>>>>> &r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >>>>>>> ============================================================ >>>>>>> ================== >>>>>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>> (original) >>>>>>> +++ >>>>>>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed >>>>>>> Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >>>>>>> <field name="originalPortalPageId" >>>>>>> position="2"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="portalPageName" >>>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>>>> }"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" >>>>>>> position="2"><text-find/></fie >>>>>>> ld> >>>>>>> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc >>>>>>> ription}"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" >>>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="searchButton" >>>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" >>>>>>> widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >>>>>>> </form> >>>>>>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >>>>>>> <text/> >>>>>>> </field> >>>>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" >>>>>>> position="2"><text/></field> >>>>>>> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >>>>>>> - <field name="description" position="2"><text >>>>>>> size="60"/></field> >>>>>>> + <field name="portalPageName" >>>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>>>> }"><text/></field> >>>>>>> + <field name="description" >>>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" >>>>>>> position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >>>>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" > >>>>>>> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> >> > > |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
Administrator
|
Thanks for the reminder Nicolas, since nobody opposes I reverted at revision: 1761923
Jacques Le 22/09/2016 à 13:36, Nicolas Malin a écrit : > I see no improvement to use a dedicate title as same the FormFieldTitle. > > More a form is light, more is readable and maintainable. Yes I'm lazy, and it's good for my healthy :) > > If we change or improve the engine for the label, all specific use would be manage direclty. > > On the other way, if you want surcharge the label, you can do on your component, or/and surcharge the form with the specific label. > > Nicolas > > > Le 21/09/2016 à 17:45, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : >> I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that everybody agree about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature >> >> So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment to raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this discussion back >> in the limbo >> >> Jacques >> >> >> Le 21/09/2016 à 16:04, Michael Brohl a écrit : >>> Jacques, >>> >>> please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history cleaner. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Michael >>> >>> >>> Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux: >>>> I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D) >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> >>>> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : >>>>> I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future >>>>> then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration >>>>> for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention then >>>>> we should remove the related code accordingly. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl <[hidden email]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'd suggest to revert this commit. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Jacques, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: >>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and >>>>>>> FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not >>>>>>> check these ones). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm >>>>>>> entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. >>>>>>> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gil >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Author: jleroux >>>>>>>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>>>>> New Revision: 1761687 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >>>>>>>> Log: >>>>>>>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various >>>>>>>> applications >>>>>>>> (OFBIZ-8110) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these >>>>>>>> field >>>>>>>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared >>>>>>>> (common) label >>>>>>>> could have sufficed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As examples you can take: >>>>>>>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >>>>>>>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as >>>>>>>> sub tasks >>>>>>>> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the >>>>>>>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks: Pierre Smits >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ >>>>>>>> myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687 >>>>>>>> &r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >>>>>>>> ============================================================ >>>>>>>> ================== >>>>>>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>>> (original) >>>>>>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed >>>>>>>> Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>>>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >>>>>>>> <field name="originalPortalPageId" >>>>>>>> position="2"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>>> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>>>>> }"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></fie >>>>>>>> ld> >>>>>>>> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc >>>>>>>> ription}"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" >>>>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>>> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" >>>>>>>> widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >>>>>>>> </form> >>>>>>>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >>>>>>>> <text/> >>>>>>>> </field> >>>>>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> >>>>>>>> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >>>>>>>> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>>>>>>> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>>>>> }"><text/></field> >>>>>>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" >>>>>>>> position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>>>>>>> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >>>>>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" > >>>>>>>> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > |
Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/my
|
Administrator
|
Now I'm thinking: there is a reason why people think <<hey, a label miss there, I need to put a title="....">>.
So I will add a small sentence saying to look before for a possible FormFieldTitle_ in the autocompletion help (widget-form.xsd) Jacques Le 22/09/2016 à 14:22, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : > Thanks for the reminder Nicolas, since nobody opposes I reverted at revision: 1761923 > > Jacques > > > Le 22/09/2016 à 13:36, Nicolas Malin a écrit : >> I see no improvement to use a dedicate title as same the FormFieldTitle. >> >> More a form is light, more is readable and maintainable. Yes I'm lazy, and it's good for my healthy :) >> >> If we change or improve the engine for the label, all specific use would be manage direclty. >> >> On the other way, if you want surcharge the label, you can do on your component, or/and surcharge the form with the specific label. >> >> Nicolas >> >> >> Le 21/09/2016 à 17:45, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : >>> I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that everybody agree about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature >>> >>> So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment to raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this discussion >>> back in the limbo >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> >>> Le 21/09/2016 à 16:04, Michael Brohl a écrit : >>>> Jacques, >>>> >>>> please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history cleaner. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Michael >>>> >>>> >>>> Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux: >>>>> I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D) >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : >>>>>> I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future >>>>>> then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration >>>>>> for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention then >>>>>> we should remove the related code accordingly. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Michael Brohl <[hidden email]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd suggest to revert this commit. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Jacques, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: >>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and >>>>>>>> FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not >>>>>>>> check these ones). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Moreover i liked Michael answer on this JIRA : >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8056?focusedComm >>>>>>>> entId=15501066&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system. >>>>>>>> issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15501066 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Gil >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Le 21/09/2016 à 09:34, [hidden email] a écrit : >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Author: jleroux >>>>>>>>> Date: Wed Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>>>>>> New Revision: 1761687 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1761687&view=rev >>>>>>>>> Log: >>>>>>>>> Improves: Maximise the utilisation of common labels in various >>>>>>>>> applications >>>>>>>>> (OFBIZ-8110) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There are many commonalities among entity field definitions. Often these >>>>>>>>> field >>>>>>>>> definitions have led to unique label definitions, where a shared >>>>>>>>> (common) label >>>>>>>>> could have sufficed. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As examples you can take: >>>>>>>>> * the various Id fields (where for most label CommonId could be used) >>>>>>>>> * the various Type fields (where for most label CommonType could be used) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is a placeholder ticket, intended to capture applicable issues as >>>>>>>>> sub tasks >>>>>>>>> to address the aspect of maximising the utilisation of labels in the >>>>>>>>> CommonUiLabels.xml file and to track progress. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks: Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>>>> ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>>>> URL:http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ >>>>>>>>> myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml?rev=1761687 >>>>>>>>> &r1=1761686&r2=1761687&view=diff >>>>>>>>> ============================================================ >>>>>>>>> ================== >>>>>>>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml >>>>>>>>> (original) >>>>>>>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml Wed >>>>>>>>> Sep 21 07:34:13 2016 >>>>>>>>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ under the License. >>>>>>>>> <field name="originalPortalPageId" >>>>>>>>> position="2"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>>>> <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>>>>>> }"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text-find/></fie >>>>>>>>> ld> >>>>>>>>> - <field name="description"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDesc >>>>>>>>> ription}"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" position="2" >>>>>>>>> title="${uiLabelMap.CommonSecurityGroupId}"><text-find/></field> >>>>>>>>> <field name="searchButton" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonFind}" >>>>>>>>> widget-style="smallSubmit"><submit button-type="button"/></field> >>>>>>>>> </form> >>>>>>>>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ under the License. >>>>>>>>> <text/> >>>>>>>>> </field> >>>>>>>>> <field name="parentPortalPageId" position="2"><text/></field> >>>>>>>>> - <field name="portalPageName"><text/></field> >>>>>>>>> - <field name="description" position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>>>>>>>> + <field name="portalPageName" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonName >>>>>>>>> }"><text/></field> >>>>>>>>> + <field name="description" title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" >>>>>>>>> position="2"><text size="60"/></field> >>>>>>>>> <field name="sequenceNum"><text/></field> >>>>>>>>> <field name="securityGroupId" > >>>>>>>>> <drop-down allow-empty="true"> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > |
«
Return to OFBiz - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |