Yep I could reproduce with with that simple page any bean with a default value will work :
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='windows-1252'?> <jsp:root xmlns:jsp="http://java.sun.com/JSP/Page"; version="2.0" xmlns:f="http://java.sun.com/jsf/core"; xmlns:tr="http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad"; xmlns:trh="http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad/html";> <jsp:output omit-xml-declaration="true" doctype-root-element="HTML" doctype-system="http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"/> <jsp:directive.page contentType="text/html;charset=windows-1252"/> <f:view> <html> <trh:head title="Test"> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"/> </trh:head> <trh:body> <tr:form> <tr:messages/> <tr:inputText label="#{stepDummy2.label}" required="true" readOnly="true"/> <tr:commandButton text="commandButton 1"/> </tr:form> </trh:body> </html> </f:view> </jsp:root> On 10/30/06, Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It was like that about a month ago. I found it while working on the visited attribute and the train renderer, using the same demo than when I first added it and it was working perfectly before. I assume it's a new bug. I'll try to reproduce it in a simpler environment, e.g. a field and a button :P On 10/30/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yeah, I'm with Gab here - you should never hit validation at all. > > -- Adam > > > On 10/30/06, Gabrielle Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Really? I thought the renderer checks "wasSubmitted" which checks for > > readOnly and disabled. SubmittedValue should then be set to null, and > in > > UIXEditableValue's validate if submittedValue is null validate is > > bypassed: > > > > Object submittedValue = getSubmittedValue(); > > if (submittedValue == null) > > return; > > > > Thanks, > > > > Gab > > > > Simon Lessard wrote: > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > I just found out that if you use an inputText with readOnly and > > > required set > > > to true, validation will always fail, even if there's data in the > > > underlying > > > bean. Anyone heard about this before? > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > ~ Simon > > > > > > > > >
