Template editor fieldset indentation and checkbox columns

[ryan]

I committed a couple small additions this morning:

1. Fieldset indentation in the template editor. Hard to describe, but I needed some way to make the grouping of fieldsets a little easier to see in the asmSelect list in the template editor. Here's a screenshot which describes it better than I can:

2. The InputfieldCheckboxes field now supports columns. This would typically be used if you had a Page reference field using the Checkboxes input. When editing the field, you'll see a new option on the 'input' tab where you can specify a number of columns you want it to use. This is just a way to tighten things up for when you have lots of short-labeled checkboxes (see bottom of screenshot).

[raydale]

That's a good usability update, thanks for this Ryan.

Have you thought about adding a css class to the list item on a fieldset or tab - enabling you to change its colour? I'm just thinking that colour coding the list items (maybe a dark grey or something) would work nicely in addition to the indenting - meaning clear legibility at a glance.

[ryan]

Have you thought about adding a css class to the list item on a fieldset or tab - enabling you to change its colour?

Actually those were added at the same time as this update. I experimented with it and it works nicely, but decided just to make them bold rather than changing the color. But you can change the color, background color (or the entire row) or anything else with it from an admin theme. Here are the relevant classes:

• #ProcessTemplateEdit .asmFieldset - applies to both starting and ending fieldsets or tabs
  
• #ProcessTemplateEdit .asmFieldsetStart - applies just to starting fieldsets or tabs
  
• #ProcessTemplateEdit .asmFieldsetEnd - applies just to ending fieldsets or tabs
  
• #ProcessTemplateEdit .asmFieldsetIndent - controls the width of the indent, adjust with css width property
  

[apeisa]

Thanks Ryan, nice addition. I really like all the small details you have added lately (on top of the big new features of course)!

[slkwrm]

Great update, Ryan! Subtle changes like this gradually push PW closer towards being ideal CMS/CMF. Very useful and needed additions.

[charliez]

Yep, really nice for customizing the client experience!

Small details but they add to great features!!

[formmailer]

Great additions Ryan.

Talking about the checkbox input field: yesterday I was looking for an option to have a checkbox checked by default, but I couldn't find it.

Would it possible to add this?

/Jasper

[raydale]

Actually those were added at the same time as this update. I experimented with it and it works nicely, but decided just to make them bold rather than changing the color. But you can change the color, background color (or the entire row) or anything else with it from an admin theme. Here are the relevant classes:

• #ProcessTemplateEdit .asmFieldset - applies to both starting and ending fieldsets or tabs
  
• #ProcessTemplateEdit .asmFieldsetStart - applies just to starting fieldsets or tabs
  
• #ProcessTemplateEdit .asmFieldsetEnd - applies just to ending fieldsets or tabs
  
• #ProcessTemplateEdit .asmFieldsetIndent - controls the width of the indent, adjust with css width property
  

Nice! Good to know there are options and css classes have been thought about. I need to look into creating an admin theme.

[ryan]

Talking about the checkbox input field: yesterday I was looking for an option to have a checkbox checked by default, but I couldn't find it.

Would it possible to add this?

Default values aren't yet supported. I've been planning and looking for a way to support them with all fieldtypes globally, but if I don't come up with a good solution there, I'll start adding default value support individually to fieldtypes where it makes sense. That checkbox one is a great example. It's looking like this is the way it will go, but I just didn't want to start having individual fieldtypes support their own default values only to later go back and have a separate solution independent of fieldtype. The same goes for required values, so the two will probably come at the same time, and it should be soon.