HTML_QuickForm | the saga continues | putting checkboxes into a group and their default value
| From: | Jeff MacDonald | Date: | Wed, 10 Dec 2003 21:57:21 +0000 |
| Subject: | HTML_QuickForm | the saga continues | putting checkboxes into a group and their default value | ||
| Groups: | php.pear.general | ||
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-general+get-9465@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
greetings,
I have, for the moment, hacked around my issues by using 'advcheckbox'
instead of plain 'checkbox'. I am using HTML_QuickForm v3.2 as per
previously.
I have the following code snippet, which uses 'checkbox', and which seems
to work fine: <http://radio.zoidtechnologies.com/tunebox/foo.php>
(source
available from the .phps file).
now, for the 'real' code, called 'track.php', I cut-and-pasted the working
code from foo.php into the right place.
whenever I access the track page in 'add' mode (i.e. nothing being loaded
from the database), it *works* in that all of the checkboxes are marked
'off', which is what I expect.
when I access the page in 'edit' mode, however (with a record being loaded
from the database), all checkboxes are *on* despite my best efforts to the
contrary-- all of the booleans coming from the database are 'f' and as far
as I know my code is detecting this and setting the defaults to "False".
now for the weird bit: the problem goes away when I use advcheckbox.
perhaps I am initializing something wrong (quite likely at this point), but
I've been struggling for a couple of days on this issue, and I'd just as
soon fix it 'properly' vs. using advcheckbox if at all possible-- I'd rather
not require javascript just for this one set of elements.
the version of track.php that I am using is available in source form from
here: <http://radio.zoidtechnologies.com/tunebox/track.phps>.
note that a lot of the code in track.phps has been commented out-- I
stripped down the code to the bare minimum to try and track down the issue
without success (until I tried advcheckbox, that is).
note that I have not yet tried to process the data-- that's another issue
entirely.
any pointers to ways to get this code to function better are most
appreciated.
regards,
J