All the validation in my system is unique to an action, but my form beans are not. It fits well in my system to have validations defined by the action path rather than the form name. Having said that, with the new getValidationKey() method, it makes overriding the default behaviour straight forward and I don't actually use the struts implementation (DynaActionValidatorForm) anyway.
My impression from questions asked on the user list is that quite a few people are using the "Action" versions and with the recent patch these are much more obvious what they do and therefore will be hopefully less confusing in the future. They also provide an example of how the default validation behaviour can be overriden which also comes up on the list occasionally. Having to define a form bean more than once just so that a different set of validation rules can be picked up isn't making struts configuration simpler IMO - I'd lobby to keep these and not deprecate them at the moment. Niall ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 1:08 AM Subject: RE: JavaScriptTag and multiple forms. Personally, I'd like to deprecate the alternate form. It only confuses people. If you want to use the same form bean in different circumstances, you can give the same form bean different names. I'd like to add extends to all the elements in 1.3, including DynaActionForm, so you'd be able to reuse DynaActionForms too. David W did add this to fulfill a specific user request, but we may have been too solicitous :) -Ted. On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 17:18:17 -0500, Joe Germuska wrote: > At 1:05 PM -0700 4/4/04, Martin Cooper wrote: >> +1000! The first time I looked at these to figure out why we had >> two, I actually thought they were the same. It wasn't until I >> really studied the Javadocs that I realised the difference. (Yay >> for Javadocs!) I'm still not clear, though, on why we actually * >> need* two different mechanisms. >> > > If one wanted to use the same form bean in different cases, one > might have different validation rules. For example, you might have > a user ID be required when creating a record, but not even have it > editable when editing the record. By associating your validation > with the submission path instead of the form bean name, you can use > the same form bean with different validation rules. > > I personally haven't used this a lot, but I can see the > justification. > > > Joe --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
