bval-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Dynamically applied constraints
Date Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:03:07 GMT

On Jun 29, 2010, at 8:49 AM, Donald Woods wrote:

> 
> 
> On 6/28/10 3:03 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>> 
>> On Jun 28, 2010, at 1:52 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 6/24/10 2:47 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>>>> Hello all--
>>>> I'm just getting my feet wet with JSR-303.  I started out using hibernate-validator,
but as a foundation member and general connoisseur of Apache Kool-Aid I thought the very least
I could do is give bval a fair shake.  So far, just browsing code and javadocs--my typical
way of acquainting myself with an OSS project--I'm impressed, FWIW.
>>>> 
>>>> What I want to do is expose all my validation information to my controller/view
layers per the standard APIs, and here's the catch:  *including* business-level validations
which can be extremely dynamic in nature.  To be more explicit, I am in the insurance industry,
which (in the US anyway) consists pretty much entirely of "special cases."
>>>> 
>>>> Firstly, is this considered out of scope of "Bean Validation" (the spec)?
 bval?  If so, why?--It's my feeling that the spec intends that "validation" be quite an open-ended
concept.  A blanket "don't do this" would simply make me question the overall usefulness of
the spec.  However, it's obvious (at least, I *think* it is) that neither the annotation-based
nor XML-based configuration methods can handle the dynamic application of constraints to a
model.  At the same time I want to be able to use those configuration methods for the subset
of validations that *can* be handled so globally.
>>>> 
>>>> I am thinking that I can reuse some of the underlying APIs from one of the
existing Bean Validation implementations to maintain this dynamic information, then implement
the ConstraintValidator for an e.g.  @DynamicValidation annotation to reuse others' machinery.
 *This* I could configure in XML; best of both worlds.  So to put this into bval terms, I
could maintain a MetaBean graph for each distinct model graph and dynamically apply constraints
per graph.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Matt, these are exactly the type of ideas/features that we should be
>>> discussing for inclusion in future releases.  We can always provide
>>> additional features beyond the spec, as long as we denote them as being
>>> implementation specific....
>>> 
>> 
>> I am trying to consume the API and get a feel for what I want to recycle.  On that
note, are there any current plans to improve bval's javadocs?  
> 
> No, just as code gets patched/reorganized it's up to the committer to
> update the Javadoc/comments as they see fit.  Of course, anyone can
> contribute patches to add missing Javadoc and we'd be happy to commit it :-)
> 
> On the original subject:  If possible/practical I would be glad for my
> work to form the basis of a dynamic validation model in bval.
> 
> Great!  Since you're an existing committer (and Member) we could look at
> setting up our sandbox area in svn so you could create your own branch
> to work on the changes until you're ready to have the community review
> them for inclusion in trunk.  Creating a new bval-dynamic module that
> extends bval-jsr303 would be a great way to provide optional behavior,
> like the existing bval-guice and bval-json modules.
> 

I'll let you know if I am able to come up with something that is both substantial and reusable,
then.  :)

-Matt

>> 
>> Regards,
>> Matt
>> 
>>> -Donald
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> This email has written itself in the sense that writing down my thoughts
led to numerous edits and sculpted the above-outlined approach, which I'm tentatively feeling
pretty good about, but I'd still like to get preliminary feedback from the community on the
oh-shit level of the task I'm setting myself.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Matt
>> 
>> 


Mime
View raw message