It would be nice if it will be possible to bind multiple viewmodel to a single DOM container. Like xaml binding in witch you can specify a "Binding Source" adding a simple way to specify different viewmodel can help in many real situation. The solution can be accomplished very easily. If you introduce an override of kendo.bind in witch u can specify a key string for identify a viewmodel then with a data attribute or a custom binding you can filter when activate or not the bindings. 

ObservableArray currently implements some of the ES-5 Array functions, including:
indexOf(), forEach(), map(), filter(), find(), every(), some()

Like the other Array functions, ObservableArray should use the native implementations of these functions if the browser implements them (IE9+, Firefox, Webkit, etc.).

When a template is declaratively bound in the markup there is currently no way to change it.


In order to make our app changeable by the owners of the data.  We're trying to make everything somewhat generic.  So Ajax call happens, they can provide us with the data and template to use.

However with MVVM there isn't any way for us to actually USE that template.


Steve

Current way of implementing functions in viewmodels suck because you have to use this.get and this.set to access the viewmodel properties. 
The syntax would be much prettier if you can use advantage of TypeScript strong typing.

For performance reasons, it would be nice to be able to stop the change notification for the change of a single property value on a single item in an ObservableArray (or DataSource) from causing the whole ObservableArray from raising a change notification for its bindings.

This causes all the bindings for all the items to be re-evaluated.

It would be exponentially helpful if the "ObservableArray" implemented some basic "Where/Select/Single" methods. This would assist in searching through them and give Kendo UI a much needed facelift in the array department.

Behavior would be, theoretically, as follows...

var viewModel = kendo.observable({
    Users: [
    {
       id: 1,
       name: "Stacey"
     },
     {
       id: 2,
       name: "Dylan"
     },
     {
       id: 3,
       name: "John"
     }
 ]
});

var idSearch = 1;

var result = kendo.Search(viewModelArray).Where(function(x) { return x.id == idSearch });

or ...

var result = kendo.Search(viewModelArray)
.Single(function(x) { return x.id == idSearch });

or possibly even chained like in "linqjs"

var result = kendo.Search(viewModelArray)
.Where(function(x) { return x.id == idSearch })
.Single();

It would be nice to have some additional "flow control" for the MVVM framework, including ...

"if" -

<div data-bind="if: [property]">
    // renders if the given value is true
</div>

and "not"

<div data-bind="not: enabled">
// renders if the given value is false
</div>

and "each"
<div data-bind="each: array">
// renders this section for each item in the array given
</div>

I know some of this can be achieved with templates, but this would make it very convenient and mean we did not have to use templates everywhere, and could lead to much more natural coding.

MVVM is still lacking some of the capability that is provided by the standard widgets. For example a tooltip cannot bind it's content property to a function in a viewmodel. 

There are issues with null values not correctly binding without using a custom binder.

See demo project here: http://www.kendoui.com/code-library/mvc/grid/binding-nullable-field-to-dropdownlist-editor-in-grid.aspx

Forum post here: http://www.kendoui.com/forums/mvc/grid/nullable-property-in-grid-doesn't-update-(when-bound-to-combobox).aspx

Allow to sort an ObservableArray

The current work around is to use the native array function

Array.prototype.sort.call(myArray, myComparer);

Suppose a model is defined with settings for editable, required, validation, etc. Then this model is used a datasource's schema.

Instances of the datasource's data will be models. However, if a model is bound to some HTML view, it's settings are not applied to the view. All settings have to be manually applied to the HTML elements.

I suggest that these settings are applied automatically. Then for example, a field's property like "required" wouldn't have to be coded at two different places.

Hi Andrew,

Can you give me a scenario where a writable computed observable would be required? As the KO site states, these are very uncommon, mainly because the computed nature of the observable makes them unnecessary. If you need an update, set one or more of the dependent observables, and the computer observable also reflects the change.