Is there any added value to reimplement it? I mean, we could as well make an ErrorSummary->ModelStateDictionary converter that would allow to use the same API, as I see it's just a "dto" that is handed to some validation summary component.
On Apr 1, 9:25 pm, Ken Egozi <[email protected]> wrote: > > Just wonder if anyone find this feature interesting because I am willing to > > implement it for MonoRail. > > Yes, please. > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Rafael Teixeira <[email protected]> wrote: > > I personally would like to see such implementation as a set of components > > for monorail, that we can choose to use or not. Over time it could migrate > > to the core if people start using it a lot. > > > My two cents, > > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 7:56 AM, c.sokun <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> What I see if we need this nice view render we need to make HtmlHelper > >> & FormHelper aware of ModelState, ModelStateDictionary etc. > >> Just wonder if anyone find this feature interesting because I am > >> willing to implement it for MonoRail. > > >> On Apr 1, 3:25 am, Alex Henderson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Also as Rafael said - it tends to be a lot easier to mutate the model > >> state > >> > in filters or code before the view gets a hold of it when compared to > >> > monorail... i.e. I dont think in monorail you can easily manipulate the > >> > ErrorSummary instances to remove an error (but you can replace the error > >> > sumary entirely, so it's not impossible)... but with ModelState it's a > >> > little easier. > > >> > Technically that's more of an issue with Castle.Components.Validator > >> then > >> > monorail though - and there are generally ways to work around this in > >> > monorail because the validator component is being used... > > >> > Thoughts? > > >> > On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Alex Henderson <[email protected] > >> >wrote: > > >> > > ModelState really just allows you to ask questions like "is everything > >> > > valid" and to iterate across the state of "action" as a whole looking > >> for > >> > > errors which may have occured - basically it's a big dictionary... so > >> in > >> > > your controller you can check to see if everythings ok.. > > >> > > if (ModelState.IsValid) { .... } > > >> > > Or you could add an error for a certain parameter... > > >> > > ModelState.AddModelError("customer.Address.Street", "Street is a > >> required > >> > > value"); > > >> > > ModelState is a property of the controller, of type > >> "ModelStateDictionary" > >> > > ... and it really is just a dictionary of strings to instances of > >> > > "ModelState"... ModelState stores a list of exceptions/errors > >> > > (ModelErrorCollection) and the Value (ValueProviderResult). > > >> > > ValueProviderResult provides access to the raw value returned from the > >> > > binder, as well as what culture was used to create the raw value. > > >> > > It's not really all that different to monorail - they just invert it > >> so > >> > > that state is associated with the key, rather then having seperate > >> > > validation summaries per object - you could probably a tailor a > >> wrapper over > >> > > the top of monorails current implementation to emulate the model state > >> > > behavior to a degree. > > >> > > I've only done one ASP.Net MVC project so far as well, but I'm not > >> sure > >> > > they had an equivalent to monorails simple errors collection available > >> for > >> > > managing errors not associated with the current form that you would > >> like to > >> > > display in a validation summary.. but I could be wrong, I never needed > >> that > >> > > feature at the time. > > >> > >http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.mvc.modelstatedict. > >> .. > > >> > >http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.mvc.modelstate_mem. > >> .. > > >> > >http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.mvc.modelerrorcoll. > >> .. > > >> > >http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.mvc.modelerror_mem. > >> .. > > >> > >http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.mvc.valueproviderr. > >> .. > > >> > > Cheers, > > >> > > - Alex > > >> > > On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:23 AM, Rafael Teixeira <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > > >> > >> No, it is the pattern I've been using for decades of having the > >> various > >> > >> validators collect together their complaints about the input, so that > >> they > >> > >> can be rendered at once in the view. > >> > >> Monorail also can do that, but the good thing is that the ModelState > >> can > >> > >> be further manipulated in a easy way before being handed out to the > >> view > >> > >> engine, which I think is just a bit more difficult in Monorail, but > >> maybe > >> > >> it's just my ignorance on the subject. > > >> > >> Cheers, > > >> > >> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 8:18 AM, Markus Zywitza < > >> [email protected] > >> > >> > wrote: > > >> > >>> Is this ViewState for MVC? > > >> > >>> 2009/3/30 c.sokun <[email protected]> > > >> > >>>> Have anyone look into ASP.NET <http://asp.net/> MVC ModelState > >> feature? > > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Rafael "Monoman" Teixeira > >> > >> --------------------------------------- > >> > >> "I myself am made entirely of flaws, stitched together with good > >> > >> intentions." > >> > >> Augusten Burroughs > > > -- > > Rafael "Monoman" Teixeira > > --------------------------------------- > > "I myself am made entirely of flaws, stitched together with good > > intentions." > > Augusten Burroughs > > -- > Ken > Egozi.http://www.kenegozi.com/bloghttp://www.delver.comhttp://www.musicglue.comhttp://www.castleproject.orghttp://www.gotfriends.co.il --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Development List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
