cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sylvain Wallez <>
Subject Re: CForms validator function Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/blocks/forms/samples/forms sitemap.xmap customvalidationdemo_form.xml customvalidationdemo_template.xml
Date Thu, 06 May 2004 17:15:01 GMT
Bruno Dumon wrote:

>On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 16:23, wrote:
>>vgritsenko    2004/05/06 07:23:04
>>  Modified:    .        status.xml
>>               src/blocks/forms/samples sitemap.xmap welcome.xml
>>               src/blocks/forms/java/org/apache/cocoon/forms/flow/javascript
>>                        Form.js
>>               src/blocks/forms/java/org/apache/cocoon/forms/flow/javascript/v2
>>                        Form.js
>>               src/blocks/forms/java/org/apache/cocoon/forms/flow/javascript/v3
>>                        Form.js
>>               src/blocks/forms/samples/forms sitemap.xmap
>>  Removed:     src/blocks/forms/samples/flow customvalidationdemo.js
>>               src/blocks/forms/samples/forms customvalidationdemo_form.xml
>>                        customvalidationdemo_template.xml
>>  Log:
>>  Remove flow level custom validators
>(I highly appreciate the cleanup work, but...)
>Allthough the flow-level validator function was a hack, won't it be too
>annoying for users who are relying on it to throw it out completely?
>This will make the woody -> cforms move a bit harder...

Cleaning up means so backwards incompatibilities, and I'm +1000 to 
remove this hack. What we can do however, is check if a "validator" 
property exists in a form object and fail hard with an exception if it 
exists. That way, users will be informed that this "feature" has been 

>Also, couldn't the example be updated to how it should be done now?
>Lastly, the behaviour of the WidgetValidators are not yet a complete
>replacement for the validator function, see this important BUT in
>    public boolean validate() {
>        // Validate self only if child widgets are valid
>        //TODO: check if we should not change this to still validating
>kids first 
>        // BUT also validating the top level
>        if (widgets.validate()) {
>            return super.validate();
>        } else {
>            return false;
>        }
>    }
>Is there anyone who knows a reason why the parent shouldn't be validated
>if kids fail? Seems to be too limitting to me.

Ditto. A validator relying on other widget's values (be them children or 
not) must be consider these widgets do be potentially invalid. And there 
are some valid use cases in our "form1" sample: the "contacts" repeater 
checks uniqueness of contact names among rows, and this validation makes 
sense even if emails are invalid.


Sylvain Wallez                                  Anyware Technologies 
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }

View raw message