Misleading example for the chained bind concept

[ShahryarSaljoughi]

Description

In the second example of this section(PasswordEntry example), the two-way binding syntax is used within the parent component. which implies the fact that the author meant to have two-way binding. However the underlying component (PasswordEntry) does not have sufficient setup for supporting two-way binding.

In the current example, the PasswordEntry component binds its input element’s value to a private password field, which is only updated when the input event occurs (OnPasswordChanged). This setup does not automatically reflect changes made to the password field in the parent component (PasswordBinding) in the child component’s input element.

I suppose we should have some mechanism for reflecting the new values flowing down to the PasswordEntry component. (using OnParametersSet or updating the value of "password" within the setter of Password property).

Page URL

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/blazor/components/data-binding?view=aspnetcore-8.0

Content source URL

https://github.com/dotnet/AspNetCore.Docs/blob/main/aspnetcore/blazor/components/data-binding.md

Document ID

3f912dfc-5ba5-6c6c-ba93-1ae78508a5cc

Article author

@guardrex

[guardrex]

Hello @ShahryarSaljoughi ... That example isn't a two-way binding example. See the purple NOTE box, which explains why. I'll close as answered given that two-way binding is covered in the next section.

BTW @Rick-Anderson ... Issue labeling is still hit or miss. Sometimes they get labeled correctly, sometimes not. This issue wasn't labeled correctly. It still seems like when the Repoman changes were made that that's when things went sideways with the labeling. It might just be a coincidence, but the timing is about right for when issue labeling broke. UPDATE: I ran tests on issue labeling and pinged you on the result elsewhere.