On Friday 08 February 2008 12:13, Duncan Mac-Vicar P. wrote:
We did that time and again, and the conclusion was always that we NEED something to display to the user.
They are questioning the ultra simplified and broken definition of "candidate", not selectables per se.
Yes, that's what I meant, too.
My fear is that (again) in the course of the discussion all those who don't
need it will agree to remove it, or to overcomplicate it (which is just as
bad).
It was very similar with selectables back then, and we paid dearly for it.
That's what I meant.
CU
--
Stefan Hundhammer