On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 16:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> vgritsenko 2004/05/06 07:23:04
>
> Modified: . status.xml
> src/blocks/forms/samples sitemap.xmap welcome.xml
> src/blocks/forms/java/org/apache/cocoon/forms/flow/javascript
> Form.js
> src/blocks/forms/java/org/apache/cocoon/forms/flow/javascript/v2
> Form.js
> src/blocks/forms/java/org/apache/cocoon/forms/flow/javascript/v3
> Form.js
> src/blocks/forms/samples/forms sitemap.xmap
> Removed: src/blocks/forms/samples/flow customvalidationdemo.js
> src/blocks/forms/samples/forms customvalidationdemo_form.xml
> customvalidationdemo_template.xml
> Log:
> Remove flow level custom validators
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=108091920700001&r=1&w=2
>
(I highly appreciate the cleanup work, but...)
Allthough the flow-level validator function was a hack, won't it be too
annoying for users who are relying on it to throw it out completely?
This will make the woody -> cforms move a bit harder...
Also, couldn't the example be updated to how it should be done now?
Lastly, the behaviour of the WidgetValidators are not yet a complete
replacement for the validator function, see this important BUT in
AbstractContainerWidget:
public boolean validate() {
// Validate self only if child widgets are valid
//TODO: check if we should not change this to still validating
kids first
// BUT also validating the top level
if (widgets.validate()) {
return super.validate();
} else {
return false;
}
}
Is there anyone who knows a reason why the parent shouldn't be validated
if kids fail? Seems to be too limitting to me.
--
Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
