[Zope3-dev] zc.table and zc.resourcelibrary feedback

[Martijn Faassen]

Benji York wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote: 
[snip]
>> A second issue seems to me a bug in the javascript. When I use 
>> StandaloneSortFormatter I can click on the title of a column to sort
>> to see a sorted view. This works wonderfully well. Unfortunately the
>>  javascript is a bit simplistic in that it simply adds the
>> sort_on:list parameter over and over to the URL. This makes for very
>> long and ugly URLs. Want me to work on a bugfix?
> 
> 
> Please.  The current JavaScript is very much "the simplest thing that
> will possibly work".

I looked into it and have written some new JavaScript, but I realized 
that the sorting behavior currently is apparently dependent on the 
amount of items in the 'sort_on' list in the URL. As far as I can 
understand, getRequestSortOn flips the sorting order for each time a 
particular field is mentioned in the URL. I don't know how exactly this 
works in the case of form-based tables, where this information is, I 
believe, POSTed.

Encoding this information in the amount of times a particular item is 
present in the URL (or post body) seems odd. Was the motivation again 
"the simplest thing that will possibly work"? To really fix it, the sort 
order itself (forward or reversed) should be encoded in the URL (or 
POST), something like sort_forward=Column or sort_reversed=Column. I 
currently do not understand why this approach wasn't taken in the first 
place...

>> The third issue is more like a missing feature. I was playing with
>> the batching support, and I got it to work. Still, I had to write a
>> bit of batching code myself and to make it fully work, I'd have to
>> make sure of not showing 'previous' at the beginning of the fist
>> batch, not showing 'next' at the beginning of the last batch, and the
>> like.
> 
> Yes, when writing zc.table we weren't quite sure how the batching
> should/would work and were using it in two independent projects.  Both
> eventually grew code that's probably much like you wrote.  It would be
> interesting to work on a "default batcher".

Maybe I'll get to look into this. I still need to consider how it all 
should work together with sorting. Any hints?

Regards,

Martijn