[Grok-dev] Re: [grok-br] Grok 1.0 and beyond

Sebastian Ware sebastian at urbantalk.se
Sat Jan 5 05:07:15 EST 2008

5 jan 2008 kl. 02.27 skrev Martijn Faassen:

> Hey,
> On Jan 5, 2008 2:22 AM, Wichert Akkerman <wichert at wiggy.net> wrote:
>> Previously Martijn Faassen wrote:
>>>> - *Good* form generation: zope.formlib's is too primitive  
>>>> comparing to
>>>> Django admin interface or Archetypes, for example;
>>> Details? How are the Django admin interface or Archetypes better?
>>> Form generation always has limitations, but where are the  
>>> limitations
>>> that make you think zope.formlib is not good?
>> As mentioned before a big issue is the lack of fields and decent
>> widgets. People think in terms of email addresses, postal codes,  
>> URLs,
>> etc. I'm not aware of a formlib field or widget for any of those.
> Good point. I'm sure some of those are floating around in some z3c
> package somewhere. It's also not too hard to create some more of them.
> It'd be a good task to create them/aggregate them and make them
> installable as a megrok.* package. Should be easy enough to get
> started on for a volunteer, and I'd be happy to help people to work
> out the basics. I can also extract a tinymce-based widget from a
> codebase I'm working on (JW Kolman actually wrote it).
> More fundamentally there's also z3c.form, an alternative form system.
> It doesn't solve the widget situation though.

I agree that formlib is limited in the widgets department. The widgets  
looks neanderthal... it is an embarassment to deliver such low quality  
UI to customers. This is one of the biggest drawbacks in the Zope/Grok  
story at this point, if you ask me.

mvh Sebastian

More information about the Grok-dev mailing list