I don't know what it means by the root in UI, but we are arriving at a complex topic: Validation.
Validation is something that can happen on many levels like: - entity definition level - entity-auto level - service level - UI level - route level Each one of those has advantages and disadvantages. So I don't think this is something we can make a rule for. What if a user wants to enter a back-dated order? What if a user wants to be able to search for a date range in the past, what if the site owner wants validation on the service level for security because users can break out of browser validation and enter a back-dated dates? I think this proposal needs more information and details. Otherwise it's hard to determine what is the right decision as circumstances vary widely On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 2:45 PM Jacques Le Roux <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's only about checking at the root in UI when entering data and not let > things go as long as the value is not correct > > Jacques > > > Le 03/09/2018 à 13:08, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : > > Well, it depends on where the cross checks happen. Are you talking > > about UI? entity-auto? somewhere else? > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 11:52 AM deepak nigam <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> +1. > >> > >> Thanks for the putting this forward. Please count me in for this effort. > >> > >> > >> Thanks & Regards > >> -- > >> Deepak Nigam > >> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd. > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 2:06 PM Jacques Le Roux > >> <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I have always found that not having dates cross-checks in OFBiz is a > >>> minus. > >>> > >>> For instance while creating/editing an order we can enter > >>> > >>> * an anti-dated shipping date (eg 2018-08-1 entered today) > >>> * The recently added reserved date can be after the shipping date > >>> * etc. (not only dates but mostly) > >>> > >>> Should we not make an effort to check the consistency of fields values > >>> when they are entered? > >>> > >>> Because this is a simple question to see if we agree about making an > >>> effort on that, I don't get into more details yet > >>> > >>> Thanks for your opinions > >>> > >>> Jacques > >>> > >>> >
