Joerg Heinicke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> On 05.08.2004 16:39, Hunsberger, Peter wrote:
> 
> >>>I added this to my forms-field-styling.xsl in the template for
> >>><fi:form-template>:
> >>>
> >>>         <xsl:if test="descendant::node()/fi:upload">
> >>>                   <xsl:attribute 
> >>>name="enctype">multipart/form-data</xsl:attribute>
> >>>                 </xsl:if>
> >>>
> >>>Good idea, or bad?
> >>
> >>I'm not very fond of it, since this needs to scan the whole
> >>tree below the form-template, which might be large (if it 
> >>contains lots of widgets or large selection lists), combined 
> >>with the fact that most forms don't use uploads anyway. Just 
> >>IMHO of course.
> >  
> > I suppose it may depend on the XSLT processor, but if you 
> didn't have 
> > to use the descendant axes this could be ok.  Not knowing the 
> > structure of the Cforms templates I don't know if you can avoid 
> > descendant, but if it maps to a regular XHTML form then 
> shouldn't the 
> > fi:upload element always be a fixed number of steps away from the 
> > context of this test? IE; allowing for some kind of grouping a test 
> > like:
> > 
> >     test="./fi:upload or ./group/fi:upload"
> > 
> > would avoid scanning the whole tree (and in particular the 
> contents of 
> > things like lists)...
> 
> Not possible. The stylesheets work on the templates, which 
> can contain 
> any markup at any depth.

IOW, you're saying that there's no fixed hierarchy to the structure of
cforms? Weird; since XHTML doesn't allow forms inside forms I can't see
why this would be allowed?


Reply via email to