Symphony.

Are handles unique? Or is it possible that 2 entries can share the same handle if they have the same name? If that is the case, wouldn’t that give errors when trying to filter on the handle-name?

Handles are not unique. But there is a Unique Text Field (extension) that solves this problem by allowing you to choose whether to display an validation error when a handle clash is detected, or allow the value but append a number to the end of the handle to make it unique.

The extension is called Unique Text Input Field.

Functionality that in my opinion should really be part of the core Text Input field.

FYI, the Text Box Field extension also forces unique handles.

Functionality that in my opinion should really be part of the core Text Input field.

As additional functionality, of course.

Sure. The Unique Text Input field just adds the checkbox, it’s no different otherwise. I’m thinking that checkbox should be part of the Text Input field, since it’s so often required for web publishing.

Actually we’d need two additional checkboxes:

• create unique handles automatically
• force unique handles

I also think it should part of the core. I mentioned that when the latest bug was introduced.

BTW: The issue may be closed.

What’s the difference between force and create unique handles?

You never tried? The unique input text field will normally force unique handles, i.e. throw an error if your input is not unique. But if you check Create unique handles automatically, it will append numbers to the handle if your text input is not unique. A typical use case might be a regular article called “what happened the last week” in a news section, which would then lead to handles like this:

• what-happened-last-week
• what-happened-last-week-2
• what-happened-last-week-3

Ah! That makes sense!

You never tried?

Uhm, yes, I mean, no.

To me this functionality is essential. I have many use cases for any of the options. Here’s the same example using the standard text input field (which will not create unique handles) and building entry URLs using the entry IDs:

• http://www.example.com/articles/47/what-happened-last-week
• http://www.example.com/articles/55/what-happened-last-week
• http://www.example.com/articles/103/what-happened-last-week

In this case handle uniqueness is really unnecessary (if not unwanted). That’s why I would like to keep it optional.

anybody know the compatibility of the unique text field?

I am not sure, because there have been some problems with entity encoding. But the latest version works for me with 2.0.7.