My case is not that a validator that does not allow setting specific error messages, I want to validate a file and errors out with a generic message on
- too large - too small - PHP Upload error - ... But I want to provide a more specific message on - not provided by the user I can do that currently by setting my generic message to all the specific cases that I do not want to cover and then setting my specific message to the generic 'error'. That seems like the wrong way round to me, 'not there' is a specific case like all other cases, the generic case is 'something went wrong, but we don't know what'. Cheers felix On Jul 12, 2008, at 1:29 PM, David Zülke wrote: > Yes, I think that should be the way forward instead. It seems to me > that introducing a special error name for the most basic and generic > <error> would be like putting the cart before the horse. We should > rather fix the validators that don't have those features yet. > > > David > > > > Am 11.07.2008 um 19:05 schrieb mugeso: > >> If you mean that, >> I think some validators such as AgaviRegexValidator should be fix. >> They don't specify why the error happens. >> >> David Zülke wrote: >>> The general idea is that validators have specific error message code >>> for actual problems encountered during validation. Examples are >>> "min" >>> and "max" in the string validator. The generic <error> then >>> serves as >>> the "you need to enter this" message. >>> >>> Or did I understand something wrong? >>> >>> >>> David >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Agavi Dev Mailing List >> [email protected] >> http://lists.agavi.org/mailman/listinfo/dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Agavi Dev Mailing List > [email protected] > http://lists.agavi.org/mailman/listinfo/dev _______________________________________________ Agavi Dev Mailing List [email protected] http://lists.agavi.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
