- From: T.V Raman <raman@google.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 09:33:11 -0800
- To: beaufour@gmail.com
- Cc: mark.birbeck@x-port.net, www-forms@w3.org
Alan, Note that Mark said "number does not affect setIndex" and he is correct. The spec is also correct and in my opinion fully specifies behavior in that it says the item at current index is always "made available" to the user. All that number on xf:repeat determines is the number of itmes "around" the current index item that are made available to the user. A consequence of this is what you point out, i.e. if you do a setindex operation, the items that are available to the user change, and in making that change available to the user, you have to consult the value of "number" in determining which items (in addition to current index) you need to make available. >>>>> "Allan" == Allan Beaufour <beaufour@gmail.com> writes: Allan> 2005/11/28, Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>: >> Finally, on the specific questions raised in this thread: >> no, @number doesn't affect index() or setindex, Allan> Allan> It's not specified, I'll give you that. But indirectly Allan> it must influence setindex handling, because if you Allan> set the index to a row that is not currently displayed Allan> my guess is that you should "scroll" the repeat to Allan> show that row. Allan> >> and no, it can't be used for things like paging. The >> latter needs to be set up by the form author (there are a >> number of examples on our site). Allan> Allan> Why can it not be used for paging? Allan> Allan> (I'm not looking for a big discussion -- I'm just Allan> speculating :) ) Allan> Allan> -- .... Allan Allan> Allan> -- -- T. V. Raman
Received on Monday, 28 November 2005 17:34:39 UTC