On 2/14/07, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>From: "Niall Pemberton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > FYI > Besides the missing trim function, the shale version of this script file overrides the "jcv_retrieveFormName" function. The form name is used to formulate the callback functions. JSF adds the colon ":" character as a namspace delimiter in the form's "id" attribute. The custom shale function removes the ":" replacing it with an underscore "_".
Yes I added that as well - see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VALIDATOR-224 Niall
Gary > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Niall Pemberton > Date: Feb 14, 2007 8:48 PM > Subject: Re: shale-validator.jar and commons-validator.jar both > contains different validateUtilities.js > To: Jakarta Commons Users List > > On 2/14/07, Hasan Turksoy wrote: > > thanks for your reply Niall.. > > > > when i looked into both jars with care, it seems the best solution is; > > removing trim methods from validator scripts and use the shale's > > validateUtilities.js file (it contains trim method - it's reasonable because > > trim is a utility method and every validator script can use it from here)... > > But IMO, validateUtilities.js file must be in commons-validator.jar... this > > protects two headed implementations in the future... > &g t; I have applied the Shale customizations to the validatorUtilities.js > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VALIDATOR-223 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=507611 > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VALIDATOR-224 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=507685 > > Niall > > > hasan > > > > > > On 2/14/07, Niall Pemberton wrote: > > > > > > On 2/14/07, Hasan Turksoy wrote: > > > > hi all, > > > > > > > > it seems that; shale-validator.1.0.4.jar and > > > > commons-validator.1.3.1.jarboth including > > > > validateUtilities.js file at org.apache.shale.org path... > > > > > > > > what's bad is; these two validateUtilities.js are different.. so, > > > ; > commons-validator's validator scripts trying to use shale-validator's > > > > validateUtilities.js instead of their own validateUtilities.js file > > > because > > > > of the class path mechanism... > > > > > > > > why they are different? AND which one of these validateUtilities.js file > > > > should i use? OR am i doing something wrong? > > > > > > Until you raised it I wasn't aware of this and it would be more > > > appropriate to ask the Shale developers why they provided a customized > > > version of the script. Having said that, looking at their subversion > > > repository[1] and the changes they made - it appears to be for the > > > following Jira issue tickets: > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/SHALE-194 > > > https://issues.apache.org/struts/ browse/SHALE-248 > > > > > > SHALE-194 is obviously a workaround for the ids generated by JSF for > > > components. > > > > > > SHALE-248 I'm not sure about - the trim() method has been in > > > validateRequired.js for a long time and is still there in Validator > > > 1.3.1 - it probably should be in validateUtilities.js but my guess is > > > they experienced a problem (probably if the "required" validator is > > > not utilized and therefore the JavaScript for it not rendered). > > > > > > As to your question of which should you use - for SHALE-194 it looks > > > like you need to use the Shale version - but better if you confirm > > > this with Shale: > > > > > > http://shale.apache.org/mail-lists.html > > > > > > Niall > > > > > > [1] htt p://tinyurl.com/2wwhj2 > > > > > > > thanks for your interest.. > > > > > > > > hasan > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > >
