[Grok-dev] Re: What would a megrok.z3cform (and a
Zope2/plone.z3cform equivalent) look like?
optilude at gmx.net
Tue Aug 5 17:39:21 EDT 2008
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> grok.View adds more goodies than just creating a custom template. It has
> the very essential 'url' method. Anyway, I'd expect all views, including
> forms, to be Grok views. We can't suddenly have a major exception.
>>> This suggests to me the
>>> introduction of a new base classes for EditForm, AddForm etc in
>>> megrok.form anyway, which also helps answering the import question.
>> I think having to maintain a parallel base class hierarchy is a bit of a
>> shame, and breaks existing z3c.form documentation in a way, but it's
>> probably not so bad.
> I think it cannot be sensibly avoided if we assume grok.View style
> behavior. For the other namespaces, we shouldn't start flattening
> things, I agree. Perhaps for convenience import things like 'button' and
> 'field' into the megrok.form namespace too.
btw, are we saying megrok.form, or megrok.z3cform?
Also, what would the Five/Zope 2 name be? five.grok.z3cform?
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book
More information about the Grok-dev