DOC Document scaffolding formfields for model relations #527
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
emteknetnz
approved these changes
Jun 6, 2024
| @@ -83,6 +83,91 @@ You can also alter the fields of built-in and module `DataObject` classes by imp | |||
| > [!NOTE] | |||
| > `FormField` scaffolding takes [`$field_labels` config](#field-labels) into account as well. | |||
|
|
|||
| ## Scaffolding for relations | |||
|
|
|||
| Form fields are also automatically scaffolded for `has_one`, `has_many`, and `many_many` relations. These have sensible default implementations, but you can customise what form field will be used for any given `DataObject` model. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| Form fields are also automatically scaffolded for `has_one`, `has_many`, and `many_many` relations. These have sensible default implementations, but you can customise what form field will be used for any given `DataObject` model. | |
| Form fields are also automatically scaffolded for `has_one`, `has_many`, and `many_many` relations. These have sensible default implementations, and you can also customise what form field will be used for any given `DataObject` model. |
"but" kind of negates what is said before it, though sensible defaults and not something to negate.
| Form fields are also automatically scaffolded for `has_one`, `has_many`, and `many_many` relations. These have sensible default implementations, but you can customise what form field will be used for any given `DataObject` model. | ||
|
|
||
| > [!NOTE] | ||
| > Polymorphic `has_one` relations do not have scaffolded form fields. Usually these are managed via a `has_many` relation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| > Polymorphic `has_one` relations do not have scaffolded form fields. Usually these are managed via a `has_many` relation. | |
| > Polymorphic `has_one` relations do not have scaffolded form fields. Usually these are managed via a `has_many` relation on the other side of the relation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What side is "the other side"? I think this makes it more confusing rather than clearer.
I'll try "which points at the has_one relation" instead and see what you think.
emteknetnz
requested changes
Jun 6, 2024
GuySartorelli
force-pushed
the
pulls/5/scaffolding-model-relations
branch
from
f5767a5 to
22490ba
Compare
emteknetnz
requested changes
Jun 6, 2024
| @@ -83,6 +83,91 @@ You can also alter the fields of built-in and module `DataObject` classes by imp | |||
| > [!NOTE] | |||
| > `FormField` scaffolding takes [`$field_labels` config](#field-labels) into account as well. | |||
|
|
|||
| ## Scaffolding for relations | |||
|
|
|||
| Form fields are also automatically scaffolded for `has_one`, `has_many`, and `many_many` relations. These have sensible default implementations, and you can also customise what form field will be used for any given `DataObject` model. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| Form fields are also automatically scaffolded for `has_one`, `has_many`, and `many_many` relations. These have sensible default implementations, and you can also customise what form field will be used for any given `DataObject` model. | |
| Form fields are also automatically scaffolded for `has_one`, `has_many`, and `many_many` relations on the form created when editing DataObjects, with the notable exception of the [SiteTree](api:SilverStripe\CMS\Model\SiteTree) edit form. These have sensible default implementations, and you can also customise what form field will be used for any given `DataObject` model. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've put it in the section above this instead, since that isn't something unique to fields scaffolded for relations.
GuySartorelli
force-pushed
the
pulls/5/scaffolding-model-relations
branch
from
22490ba to
d2f3867
Compare
emteknetnz
approved these changes
Jun 7, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issue
DataObjectsubclass to define its own formfield when autoscaffolded from relation silverstripe-framework#11079