commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32873] - [validator] Extension to provide test cases for client-side validation
Date Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:01:47 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32873>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32873





------- Additional Comments From nacho@visual-ma.com  2004-12-30 10:01 -------
Hi Martin, I totally agree with you. In fact I am not trying to propose a js
framework, I am trying to explain that with the actual validator functions,
testing is very difficult as it requires user interaction or at least preset
html pages. This is why I beleive there should be a clear separation between
validators and forms. We could acheive this by using a function in between forms
and validators that would act as a sort of controller and pass on the "real"
values from fields to validators. This is where grabValuesFromSingleField and
validateField (you can find them in the bug description) come in. Some other
benefits we would encounter:

- Reduce duplicity in code as validators would not have to grab the values from
the fields (increasing reusability, easing (a lot) maintainability and having a
consistent field-handling-behaviour with all validators).

- Correct (and consistent) field handling. At the moment validator doesn't
validate an input field with multiple values (quite annoying sometimes).

- People would find it much easier to submit new validators as they would only
have to worry about the validator itself and not grabbing values from fields.

- Use client side validation outside html pages. It would only require rewriting
the way we grab the values from form fields. A js interpreter could then do the
job. (Not sure about the real utility of this one)

I don't know if the functions I propose would do the best job, I am trying to
start a debate about client side validation so we can have it functioning as
expected.

> I don't know which is better, but I know who to ask, so let me know if there is 
> interest in pursuing this. Here are links to the two frameworks:
> 
> http://www.edwardh.com/jsunit/
> http://jsunit.berlios.de/

At a first and quick glance I much prefer edwardh's jsunit. I also think his
liscensing fits better into apache (berlios' seems to have only gnu liscence). I
can help to provide test cases for js validators but IMHO a decision has to be
made about all this.



-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message