[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-2485?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Ashwin Prabhu updated TRINIDAD-2485:
------------------------------------

    Status: Patch Available  (was: Open)

> Some attribute behaviors in tr:validateDateRestriction donot match their 
> documentation
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: TRINIDAD-2485
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-2485
>             Project: MyFaces Trinidad
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Components
>    Affects Versions: 2.1.0-core
>            Reporter: Ashwin Prabhu
>   Original Estimate: 24h
>  Remaining Estimate: 24h
>
> There are several issues in tr:validateDateRestriction. Here's a 
> attribute-wise list of problems which need to be fixed:
> Attribute: invalidDays
> The start and end dates passed into the method getDateList of 
> DateListProvider needs to be 24 hour wide. Currently the same date is passed 
> for start and end range, defeating the purpose of haveing 2 parameters. The 
> current arrangement works only if DateListProvider strictly goes by the date 
> part and ignores the time component in the start and end range.
> The documentation of DateListProvider has this:
> rangeStart - The start of the range for which dates are being requested.
> rangeEnd - The end of the range for which dates are being requested.
> Although not literallly mentioned, the implicit messaging of the parmater 
> description suggests the time part of the date range cannot be ignored.
> Attribute: messageDetailInvalidDaysOfWeek
> The documentation of message parameters states this:
> {0} the label that identifies the component
> {1} value entered by the user
> {2} the invalid weekday
> Currently the values passed as 3rd parameter ({2}) on the client contains a 
> list of all the days of the week, but for the user selected week. This 
> behavior is wrong as per the documentation. To see this behavior in acion 
> please visit 
> http://example.irian.at/trinidad-demo/faces/convertValidate/dateRestrictionValidate.jspx
>  and select any monday in the 3rd input Date. You will see a error message 
> "Enter a date that is on one of the following days: Tuesday, Wednesday, 
> Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday". Here both the message and the week-day 
> parameters are worng. On the server however this is done as per the 
> documentation, but the passed in weekday is not localized, but picked up from 
> the internal _dayMap map containing the week days as "sun", "mon"...."sat" . 
> To summarize, 
> The client validator needs to pass in parameters as per the documentation. 
> The server validator needs to localize the substituted week days. 
> THe message bundle string is currently "Enter a date that falls on one of the 
> following days: {0}" also needs to be changed to match the intention in the 
> tag document.
> Attribute: messageDetailInvalidMonths
> The documentation of message parameters states this:
> {0} the label that identifies the component
> {1} value entered by the user
> {2} the invalid month
> Currently the values passed as 3rd parameter ({2}) on the client contains a 
> list of all the months of the year, but for the user selected month. This 
> behavior is wrong as per the documentation. To see this behavior in acion 
> please visit 
> http://example.irian.at/trinidad-demo/faces/convertValidate/dateRestrictionValidate.jspx
>  and select any day in November in the 2rd input Date. You will see a error 
> message "November/December dates are not allowed here!
> Enter a date in one of the following months: January, February, March, April, 
> May, June, July, August, September, October". Here both the message and the 
> month parameters are worng. On the server however this is done as per the 
> documentation, but the passed in month is not localized, but picked up from 
> the internal _monthMap map containing the months as "jan", "feb"...."dec" . 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to