Re: [Gnumed-devel] Two patches

[Karsten Hilbert]

> Ian,
> 
> I have committed your schema patches with some changes here
> and there. Your concepts are untouched though. I do like the
> way with form_fields though I am wary how it will work out.

I have thought about this more. We need to be very clear about
the separation of definitions for *display and input* - which
is what your form_fields defines - and those for turning
templates + data into a transmissible form (printing, faxing,
etc) - which is expressed by my part of the tables. The latter
can be defined completely while the former only ever can give
hints to form GUIs that will eventually lack the functionality
one wants from a form editor. Unless one makes the field type
definitions application dependant. I see problems in how to
define fields that require complex (and arbitrary !) user
support. Arbitrary meaning "being unlike any other field" here.
Strings, bools, lists and such don't do the job. Also, for
quite some lists we won't know the list content until runtime.

Karsten
-- 
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346