Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature/source datamodel #500

Open
wants to merge 100 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

JeltevanBoheemen
Copy link
Contributor

@JeltevanBoheemen JeltevanBoheemen commented Sep 26, 2021

@jgonggrijp @BeritJanssen

I wasn't able to finish this, please see below for thing that should (probably) be resolved before this can be considered done

  • Either:
  • Use item editors for optional fields (the permitted datatypes will provide ample hints for what is valid for which field). I got this sort of working, but as individual editors. These had a 'remove' button, an empty dropdown, and I didn't get around to actually sending their data to the backend. Next on my list was using a MultiField editor.
  • Provide tooltips and validation for the ISO-date/freetext fields and repository.
  • Frontend tests need to be fixed
  • Backend migrations need some testing. I might have missed some cases, only tested and confirmed migration working by hand.
  • The source types will need to be discusses with Francois. The TFO ontology is too limited for use in READ-IT. For now, non-replacable source types remain unchanged.

Please let me know if I can answers any questions, I'll be reading and answering my mail concerning this PR.

jgonggrijp and others added 29 commits May 20, 2023 17:35
The render(Container) method was never the right place to bind events
to child elements, but we got away with it when the form was still a
monolithic view. In the new composite situation, the element in
question does not exist yet during the call to renderContainer. The
conventional delegate mechanism completely avoids this problem.
The event was effectively triggered unconditionally, as an identity
comparison against a literal array will always be false.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants