Thanks. :)
--
View this message in context:
http://qooxdoo.678.n2.nabble.com/form-validation-and-invalidMessage-tp5159855p5166809.html
Sent from the qooxdoo mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
ThinkGeek and WIRED's G
On 6/10/10 1:05 AM, MartinWittemann wrote:
> Hello Greg,
> thats a thing we can not change easily. The validators supplied by the
> framework can be used for validation in the form context and for validation
> of properties. Thats why they have to throw a validation error because
> property validat
Hey,
thats exactly what I had in mind. :) Would you mind opening a bug for that?
Regards,
Martin
--
View this message in context:
http://qooxdoo.678.n2.nabble.com/form-validation-and-invalidMessage-tp5159855p5162019.html
Sent from the qooxdoo mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 6/10/10 1:05 AM, MartinWittemann wrote:
>
> Hello Greg,
> thats a thing we can not change easily. The validators supplied by the
> framework can be used for validation in the form context and for validation
> of properties. Thats why they have to throw a validation error because
> property valid
Hello Greg,
thats a thing we can not change easily. The validators supplied by the
framework can be used for validation in the form context and for validation
of properties. Thats why they have to throw a validation error because
property validation can only handle exceptions which of course have
Hi,
It would be great if the built-in validation static methods such as
qx.util.Validate.regExp() did not override a custom invalidMessage() set
by the user. "234.34 does not match /^\$?\d+(,\d+)*$/" is not an error
message that I want to show to my users :)
Thanks,
Greg
---
