If I understood you correctly you suggest the approach of the annotation based ValidationConstraintGenerator. Right?
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > Em Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:59:35 -0300, Igor Drobiazko < > igor.drobia...@gmail.com> escreveu: > > One thing that is easy to do is to provide Validator implementations based >>> on annotations (@NotNull -> required, @Min(n) -> min=n), etc. >>> >> > I would not do it this way. Just image a bean which is used in several >> projects (rich clients and tapestry apps). You want your validation work >> same in all your apps. >> > > I'm not following you: why it would work differently in different apps, as > long as they're using the same validation annotation API? I'm already using > that approach and it works very well. > > -- > Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo > Independent Java consultant, developer, and instructor > http://www.arsmachina.com.br/thiago > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > -- Best regards, Igor Drobiazko
