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=31194>. 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=31194 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-07 05:39 ------- I've have removed the change I applied - re-verting back to version 1.35 of Field. I was going to apply the new patch I attached, but I had a change of mind when I came to test it in my app. I think that for arguments for a specified validator, they should automatically number on from any 'defaults' defined. Typically I find I have the following: <field propert="custNo" depends="required,integer,intRange"> <arg key="Customer Number" resource="false"/> <arg key="$(var:min}" name="intRange" resource="false"/> <arg key="$(var:max}" name="intRange" resource="false"/> </field> Where the arguments for a named validator are 'additional' to the default ones. So if someone wanted to 'override' the default they would have to do the following: <arg key="first"/> <arg key="second"/> <arg key="required.first" name="required" position="0"/> <arg key="required.second" name="required"/> <arg key="mask.first" name="mask" position="0"/> <arg key="mask.second" name="mask"/> Opinions? Niall -- 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
