Hi, It's great that we can have a POC to ensure that above scenarios supported by selected client-side validation framework.I am currently working on a sample using JQuery validation plugin as well as check with other validation frameworks too.
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Dakshika Jayathilaka <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > AFAKI we need to think about multiple scenarios before we incorporate > third party library into ES. > > Validation Scenarios: > > 1. Bind HTML5 type based validation > 2. Multiple Custom Error message support per field > 3. Dependent validation > 4. Ajax validation onChange > 5. Support for pattern based validation(Regx) > 6. Localization support > > IMHO we need to fulfill most of above scenarios in general use. Shall we > do a POC first? > > WDYT? > > Regards, > > *Dakshika Jayathilaka* > PMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos > Software Engineer > WSO2, Inc. > lean.enterprise.middleware > 0771100911 > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Rajeenthini Satkunam < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> As per discussions, I would like to use JQuery validation plugin current >> version*:* 1.13.1 to client-side validations for Enterprise Store >> Publisher.JQuery validation plugin is licensed by MIT.So can anyone please >> advice me on can I proceed this task with using JQuery validation plugin? >> >> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Rajeenthini Satkunam < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi herrmann, >>> >>> Thanks for your suggestion.As well as now I am only concerning most on >>> the client-side validation and user experience.So I have proposed the above >>> design.I will look into this link that you have provide well. >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 10:50 PM, Manfred Herrmann < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> hi Rajeenthini, >>>> >>>> the proposed jquery-validation would a realy helpful feature. >>>> But even more helpful would it be to validate on client-side in sync >>>> with server-side-validation. The data would be secure and consistent >>>> through server-side-validation. And at the same time the user experience >>>> would be great. >>>> >>>> In jaggeryjs framework codebase there are rhino and hostobjects used. >>>> Would it not a good idea to try using jquery-validation for server-side >>>> validation and sync the rules and methods to the client? >>>> >>>> The development workflow could like: >>>> 1. client-side development and test cycle >>>> 2. deploy on jaggery-server-side and test client+server-side validation >>>> >>>> What do you think? >>>> best regards >>>> Manfred >>>> >>>> >>>> e.g. some thoughts about client-/server-side validation from: >>>> http://blogs.lessthandot.com/index.php/webdev/client-side-vs-server-side-validation-in-web-applications/ >>>> >>>> Client-Side >>>> >>>>> But when we look at how well it achieves the purpose, we find it has a >>>>> lot of gaps: >>>>> >>>>> - Yes – It prevents bad values for users with good intent >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Yes – It helps the good intent user correct their value without >>>>> the overhead of a server round-trip >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - No – It prevents bad values when a script fails to load (like >>>>> jQuery) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - No – It prevents bad values as a result of malicious editing of >>>>> the web form (developer tools) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - No – It prevents bad values submitted directly to the endpoint >>>>> (ex: Cross-Site Request Forgery >>>>> <https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Cross-Site_Request_Forgery_%28CSRF%29> >>>>> ) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - No – It prevents bad values when accessed in frames >>>>> <https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Cross_Frame_Scripting> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - No – It prevents bad values when data is altered via >>>>> aMan-in-the-middle >>>>> attack <https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Man-in-the-middle_attack> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Server-Side >>>> >>>>> So how does this stack up against the client-side method? >>>>> >>>>> - Yes – It prevents bad values for users with good intent >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - No – It helps the good intent user correct their value without >>>>> the overhead of a server round-trip >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Yes – It prevents bad values when a script fails to load (like >>>>> jQuery) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Yes – It prevents bad values as a result of malicious editing of >>>>> the web form (developer tools) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Yes – It prevents bad values submitted directly to the endpoint >>>>> (ex: Cross-Site Request Forgery >>>>> <https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Cross-Site_Request_Forgery_%28CSRF%29> >>>>> ) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Yes – It prevents bad values when accessed in frames >>>>> <https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Cross_Frame_Scripting> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Yes – It prevents bad values when data is altered via a >>>>> Man-in-the-middle >>>>> attack <https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Man-in-the-middle_attack> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2015-04-08 6:53 GMT+02:00 Rajeenthini Satkunam <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> *purpose & Research* >>>>> >>>>> I am currently working on a task that do client-side validation for >>>>> the Enterprise Store - Publisher.As for now we have server-side validation >>>>> by asset RXT. For example it checks whether the field is required or >>>>> readonly as well as validation for URL.I would like to propose a design >>>>> for >>>>> pluggable client-side validation using JQuery validator. >>>>> >>>>> JQuery validation plugin makes simple client-side form validation easy >>>>> and gives plenty of customization options. >>>>> >>>>> Advantages of JQuery validation plugin >>>>> >>>>> - Set of validation methods >>>>> - Default error messages >>>>> - It's providing API for writing our own methods >>>>> - I18n support -(Error messages can be translated into 37 other >>>>> languages) >>>>> >>>>> *Proposed Design view* >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - Include another property called client-side-validation in >>>>> asset.js >>>>> - define a custom validation called validations.js in the js folder >>>>> >>>>> Here I can explain with the example >>>>> >>>>> fields: { >>>>> provider: { >>>>> readonly: true >>>>> }, >>>>> name: { >>>>> name: { >>>>> name: 'name', >>>>> label: 'Name' >>>>> }, >>>>> updatable: false, >>>>> validation: function () { >>>>> } >>>>> }, >>>>> version: { >>>>> name: { >>>>> label: 'Version' >>>>> } >>>>> }, >>>>> createdtime: { >>>>> hidden: true >>>>> *client_side_validation* : { >>>>> >>>>> "name" : "*time_validator*", >>>>> >>>>> "params" : { "K1" : V1 , "K2" : v2 }, >>>>> >>>>> "sucess_message" : "validation sucess", >>>>> >>>>> "error_message" : "validation unsucess" >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> } >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> And the custom validator method in validations.js file >>>>> >>>>> jQuery.validator.addMethod(name,method[,message]) >>>>> >>>>> jQuery.validator.addMethod("*time_validator*",method,message); >>>>> >>>>> So when the function call by proper validation name It will be >>>>> validate the field which satisfy the validations regarding to that >>>>> function >>>>> and will give proper success message or error message. >>>>> >>>>> please find the references about jQuery validator[1] >>>>> [1] - http://jqueryvalidation.org/ >>>>> >>>>> Please share your thoughts. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> *Thank You.* >>>>> >>>>> *Rajeenthini Satkunam* >>>>> >>>>> *Associate Software Engineer | WSO2* >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *E:[email protected] <[email protected]>* >>>>> >>>>> *M :+94770832823 <%2B94770832823> * >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Architecture mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Architecture mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> *Thank You.* >>> >>> *Rajeenthini Satkunam* >>> >>> *Associate Software Engineer | WSO2* >>> >>> >>> *E:[email protected] <[email protected]>* >>> >>> *M :+94770832823 <%2B94770832823> * >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> *Thank You.* >> >> *Rajeenthini Satkunam* >> >> *Associate Software Engineer | WSO2* >> >> >> *E:[email protected] <[email protected]>* >> >> *M :+94770832823 <%2B94770832823> * >> >> > -- *Thank You.* *Rajeenthini Satkunam* *Associate Software Engineer | WSO2* *E:[email protected] <[email protected]>* *M :+94770832823 *
_______________________________________________ Architecture mailing list [email protected] https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
