doh ! I always mix mailing lists....
don't bother with this email !!! -M On 9/26/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi guys, > > this mail on the Trinidad list ([1]) lead me to the following issue. > > In Trinidad, we extend the standard validators, like the > doubleRangeValidator, but the "logic" of the validate is inherited. > Inside of save/restore State methods, we delegate to the FacesBean > instance, which takes care of saving / restoring all properties, like > maximum or some Trinidad extra properties like "messageDetailMaximum". > See [2] for the full source code. > > When using Trinidad on top of the RI (and client side validation is > DISABLED), there are some issues (see [1]). It looks like there is a > private property used the the RI (DoubleRange)Validator to indicate if > maximum or minimum has been set (and these properties are also saved / > restored). Since this is private, it's "odd" to add this property to > Trinidad's (DoubleRange)Validator as well, to get it working with the > RI, isnt' it ? > > I checked the MyFaces IMPL code of (DoubleRange)Validator (see [3]) > and it doesn't use such a property. So here, this combination (MyFaces > + Trinidad (client validation DISABLED) works. > > What do you think about this ? > Do you want me to file an issue ? > > Thx, > Matthias > > [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg42199.html > [2] http://tinyurl.com/22ojtz > [3] http://tinyurl.com/3bvsdb > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > further stuff: > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
