Skip to content

HTTPS clone URL

Subversion checkout URL

You can clone with HTTPS or Subversion.

Download ZIP
Browse files

Fixed #2769 -- Applied some ReST formatting fixes. Thanks, ramiro.

git-svn-id: http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk@3774 bcc190cf-cafb-0310-a4f2-bffc1f526a37
  • Loading branch information...
commit e947fb2111c575b6005c9a291c25d85a959e8b1f 1 parent d296e5e
@malcolmt malcolmt authored
Showing with 5 additions and 4 deletions.
  1. +1 −0  AUTHORS
  2. +1 −1  docs/db-api.txt
  3. +3 −3 docs/forms.txt
View
1  AUTHORS
@@ -122,6 +122,7 @@ answer newbie questions, and generally made Django that much better:
Daniel Poelzleithner <http://poelzi.org/>
J. Rademaker
Michael Radziej <mir@noris.de>
+ ramiro
Brian Ray <http://brianray.chipy.org/>
rhettg@gmail.com
Oliver Rutherfurd <http://rutherfurd.net/>
View
2  docs/db-api.txt
@@ -1511,7 +1511,7 @@ Many-to-many relationships
--------------------------
Both ends of a many-to-many relationship get automatic API access to the other
-end. The API works just as a "backward" one-to-many relationship. See _Backward
+end. The API works just as a "backward" one-to-many relationship. See Backward_
above.
The only difference is in the attribute naming: The model that defines the
View
6 docs/forms.txt
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ template::
{% endblock %}
Before we get back to the problems with these naive set of views, let's go over
-some salient points of the above template::
+some salient points of the above template:
* Field "widgets" are handled for you: ``{{ form.field }}`` automatically
creates the "right" type of widget for the form, as you can see with the
@@ -148,8 +148,8 @@ some salient points of the above template::
If you must use tables, use tables. If you're a semantic purist, you can
probably find better HTML than in the above template.
- * To avoid name conflicts, the ``id``s of form elements take the form
- "id_*fieldname*".
+ * To avoid name conflicts, the ``id`` values of form elements take the
+ form "id_*fieldname*".
By creating a creation form we've solved problem number 3 above, but we still
don't have any validation. Let's revise the validation issue by writing a new
Please sign in to comment.
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.