Those are annoying especially when using GET as method.

Recently we had several request for manipulating form state initialization like:

• Initialize the state from some third party tool like SAP or marketing automation
• Restore the form state after mail verification without persisting the complete state in the state hash
• Restore the form state after returning from some third party authentication process

In Neos.Fusion.Form:FieldContainer the class property is ignored and the error class is always rendered.

In my opinion the condition for the error class should be in braces. That worked for me.

PR: #54

For some form fields like checkboxes an empty value is needed to ensure that null values get actually submitted. Those empty values should be created in the form rendering by parsing the content similar to what is done for trusted properties.

If you have a label with the attribute for it needs an form field who has also id. The name attribute is not enough

Currently the fields that are added to the FormRequest are only validated on the uppermost layer against the trustedProperties.

This should be made a recursive algorithm eventually.

See: https://github.com/neos/fusion-form/blob/master/Classes/Runtime/Domain/FormRequestFactory.php#L42-L51

Currently the token uses a very simple xpath selector to find all names. We will probably have to tweak this and check wether the empty "[]" at the end of multivalues are already properly supported.

When using Select with Options the rendering can break in some cases when passing domain models (or other objects) to the option value. This is because of the following code in prototype(Neos.Fusion.Form:Select.Option):

        renderer = afx`
           <option
               value={option.getTargetValueStringified()}
               selected={props.selected}
               {...props.attributes}
           >
               {props.content || option.getTargetValue()}
           </option>
        `

this should be changed to:

...
{props.content || option.getTargetValueStringified()}
...

The getName() method of the Field domain model always returns the field name with its namespace.

Would you be open to add a getter "get name without namespace" (how should we name it)?

My use case:

To add frontend validation for my form, I need to evaluate the Schema definition of a field. So I want to check if field foo is configured in the SchemaDefinition. Since the schema definition uses the field name without namespace, I cannot look it up without such a getter.

When using a form like this for calling a delete action (deleteAction(Company $company)), the required argument is missing, even though props.company contains the correct entity:

<Neos.Fusion.Form:Form form.data.company={props.company} form.target.action={"delete"}>
    <button type="submit" class="neos-button neos-button-danger" title="Eintrag löschen">
        Ja, diesen Eintrag löschen
    </button>
</Neos.Fusion.Form:Form>

When "using" something from the entity like below, it works:

<Neos.Fusion.Form:Form form.data.company={props.company} form.target.action={"delete"}>
    <!-- Necessary to enable the delete method, without this hidden field the identity were -->                           
    <Neos.Fusion.Form:Neos.BackendModule.FieldContainer field.name="company[description]" label="">
        <Neos.Fusion.Form:Hidden/>
    </Neos.Fusion.Form:Neos.BackendModule.FieldContainer>

    <button type="submit" class="neos-button neos-button-danger" title="Eintrag löschen">
        Ja, diesen Eintrag löschen
    </button>
</Neos.Fusion.Form:Form>

Feels wrong to me…

While not necessary making the target of a runtime form configurable would allow:

1. To scroll to an anchor after submitting for following steps or confirmation messages.
2. To render the first part of a form process on a different page but proceed on another one.

FieldContainer:

• Instantiate field context
• Render Label and Error
• Take Fields as Content

FieldComponent:

• Instantiate field context or reuse FieldContext from container
• Base for implement controls

Questions:

• Do we have better names for this

Szenario:
Have two different forms on one page. Bind the forms to an object so that the fields are filled form properties of that object.
If you now submit one of the forms and you have validation errors the values in the not submitted form are cleared.

The Method field.findCurrentValueByPath() returns NULL for every form field of the unsubmitted form.
Thats because $this->form->getResult()->hasErrors() is true for both forms and not just for the form that got submitted.

Expected Behaviour:
All form fields of the form that has not been touched should still display the properties of the bound object.

Just wanted to look up something in a local install and noticed the documentation is missing, due to the .gitignore config. Any particular reason to not include it? This way the readme is there but points to missing files which is a bit unfortunate :D

There should be a pure fusion way to define forms and connect them with the data handling code.

• support 100 % custom rendering
• separate data model and rendering
• can be defined via fusion (and in future via nodes)
• allow reuse of definitions via fusion prototypes
• allows to easily implement handling actions

Some FieldTypes like Checkbox, Password, Hidden are not yet implemented.
Maybe we also want a generic Neos.Fusion.Form:Input fieldType that allows to define the type via prop.

The implementation suggests to use the parent request like this:

<Neos.Fusion:Form
        form.object={example}
        form.name="example"
        form.request={request.parentRequest}
        method="post"
    >

we have to check wether this really suits the use cases for the feature

The handling of Flow Entities as identifier strings has to be checked. Probably this will not work yet.
At the current point we assume that no additional and hidden identity fields are needed.

With the following form configuration in place the submitted data values contain only the first selected file of the multiple file upload field attachments.

I have discovered that the underlying issue is how the __trustedProperties field value is created.

Form configuration

prototype(My.Package:Content.ApplicationForm) < prototype(Neos.Neos:ContentComponent) {
    renderer = Neos.Fusion.Form:Runtime.RuntimeForm {
            namespace = 'application_form'
    
            process {
                content = My.Package:Components.ApplicationForm

                schema = Neos.Fusion.Form:Runtime.SchemaCollection {
                    name = ${Form.Schema.string().isRequired()}
                    email = ${Form.Schema.string().isRequired().validator('EmailAddress')}
                    attachments = ${Form.Schema.arrayOf(Form.Schema.resource().isRequired().validator('Neos\Fusion\Form\Runtime\Validation\Validator\FileTypeValidator', { allowedMediaTypes: ['image/jpeg', 'application/pdf'] }))}
                    picture = ${Form.Schema.resource().isRequired().validator('Neos\Fusion\Form\Runtime\Validation\Validator\FileTypeValidator', { allowedMediaTypes: ['image/jpeg'] })}
                }
            }

            action {
                email {
                    type = 'Neos.Fusion.Form.Runtime:Email'
                    options {
                        senderAddress = ...
                        senderName = ${data.name}
                        replyToAddress = ${data.email}
                        recipientAddress = ...
                        subject = "..."
                        attachments {
                             multipleFileUpload = ${data.attachments}
                             singleFileUpload = ${data.picture}
                        }
                        text = "..."
                    }
                }
            }
        }
}

prototype(My.Package:Components.ApplicationForm) < prototype(Neos.Fusion:Component) {
    renderer = afx`
        <fieldset>
            <legend>Application form</legend>
        </fieldset>

        <Neos.Fusion.Form:FieldContainer field.name="name" label="Name">
            <Neos.Fusion.Form:Input>
        </Neos.Fusion.Form:FieldContainer>

        <Neos.Fusion.Form:FieldContainer field.name="email" label="Email">
            <Neos.Fusion.Form:Input 
                attributes.type="email" 
            />
        </Neos.Fusion.Form:FieldContainer>

        <!-- multiple file upload-->
        <Neos.Fusion.Form:FieldContainer field.name="attachments" label="Attachments">
            <input 
                name={field.getName() + '[]'} 
                type="file"
                multiple={true} 
            />
        </Neos.Fusion.Form:FieldContainer>

        <!-- single file upload-->
        <Neos.Fusion.Form:FieldContainer field.name="picture" label="Attachments">
            <Neos.Fusion.Form:Upload />
        </Neos.Fusion.Form:FieldContainer>
    `
}

Hey guys,
in Class: Neos.Fusion.Form/Classes/Eel/FormHelper.php the FieldDefinition constructor gets called with $multiple as NULL, but the corresponding getter only returns boolean.

FormHelper Line ~84:

if (!$name) {
    /**  new FieldDefinition(string $name = null, $value = null, $multiple = false, ...) **/
    return new FieldDefinition(null, null, null);
}

*FieldDefinition Line: ~71:

/**
 * @return bool
 */
public function isMultiple(): bool
{
    return $this->multiple;
}

Is there an existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues

Current Behavior

When data properties are used inside header or footer part of the form, the Neos.Fusion.Form:Runtime.RuntimeForm strips it's values when form is validated / processed.

Expected Behavior

The data should be keept intact if for instance the form has a custom footer button and code which should persist a form validation / reload.

Steps To Reproduce

1. create a form inside Neos.Fusion.Form:Runtime.RuntimeForm
2. add some non empty field validation
3. overwrite its footer content with defined data properties like custom submit button
4. submit empty form on the front end with validation
5. on processing the data properties are lost

Environment

- Flow: 8.3 
- Neos: 8.3
- PHP: 8.1

Anything else?

All data properties passed inside the form content withstand the issue and are working properly.

• Is this in the scope of this package?
• Should this be usable in the frontend
• How should the markup be customized
• How should Labels and errors be translated

The MultiValues for Checkboxes and Selects have to be implemented. Currently this is only done for a MultiSelectBox.

It is possible that a MultiFieldDefinition is needed which would allow us to add strict types to the form definition getValue again.