Jeremy Quinn wrote:
Hi All
As you may know, I am working heavily on the revamp of Dojo on the
client-side of CForms.
In Dojo it is possible to perform quite a lot of validation on form
fields. There is a partial match between the validation capabilities
of CForms and those of Dojo. Several people have thought in the past
that it would be good to have the same validation occur on both the
server and the client.
OTTOMH, the kind of validators we could probably make work in both
places would be :
email, length, mod10, range and regexp (plus maybe javascript, if
we can sort out any context differences)
Maybe this is my ignorance speaking, but I don't see any (clean) way of
making client side validation work. How a validation message is
presentated is left up to forms-styling (or whatever you wish to call
it), so you cannot make assumptions about how the validation is presented.
The closest solution I can see is if you created a hook function for all
validation and had the hook function propargate the errors that way.
That still sounds rather messy and sounds like a duplication of effort.
Also (if the application is fast), it would lead to some bad UI if some
of the validation is done client side some server side.
Now, if validation were rewritten in such a way that the hook functions
were called for even server side validation errors, it might provide a
rather neat way of getting around some of the problems that Ajax CForms
throw up as well as reducing duplication. I really wish I had a better
understanding of Dojo so I could fix up some of the issues related to
validation and Ajax.
ATM however, no validation information is output by the form
generation process. Datatypes are there (which I can initially use)
but no validation.
So my question is, would someone volunteer to either add the
definition's validation tags to the output or help work out the
cleanest approach to adding it?
Many thanks
regards Jeremy
--
Kamal Bhatt