That was how it was originally (same error).  Thought I might be having a type 
issue so 
added the Date.parse().  You can actually do it if it's specified in the braces 
({}).  From http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flex/quickstart/using_data_binding/ :

Note: The source property of an <mx:Binding> tag can contain curly braces. When 
there 
are no curly braces in the source property, the value is treated as a single 
ActionScript 
expression. When there are curly braces in the source property, the value is 
treated as a 
concatenated ActionScript expression.

Any other ideas?

G


--- In [email protected], "valdhor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I may be wrong but I didn't think you could use a binding with a
> function. Try removing the Date.parse function from your binding tag...
> 
> <mx:Binding source="{birthdayTI.text}"
> destination="tideContext.user.birthday"/>
> 
> 
> --- In [email protected], "hardaur55" <gander@> wrote:
> >
> > Hello all!
> > 
> >   I have a TextInput field that is to accept a date.  There is a
> date validator attached to the 
> > field and the text property of the date field is bound to a property
> in another field.  Here's 
> > the code:
> > 
> > mxml:
> > 
> > <mx:DateValidator id="validateBirthdayTI" 
> >             source="{birthdayTI}" 
> >             property="text" 
> >             required="true"/>
> > 
> > 
> > <mx:Binding source="{Date.parse(birthdayTI.text)}" 
> > destination="tideContext.user.birthday"/>
> > 
> > Actionscript:
> > 
> > formIsValid = formIsValid && validate(validateBirthdayTI);
> > 
> > 
> > When the validator runs, I get the following error when doing a
> try/catch, otherwise it fails 
> > silently.
> > 
> > "The source attribute must be specified when the property attribute
> is specified."
> > 
> > This seems to say that the source attribute for the validator isn't
> correct, but I don't see 
> > anything wrong with it (and other fields/properties are fine).  It
> also seems to somehow be 
> > tied in to the binding as if I comment out the binding it works (and
> validates) just fine.  I 
> > have a feeling I'm running up against one of those very strange Flex
> errors that don't mean 
> > what they say exactly ; )
> > 
> > Any help is very much appreciated, I've been beating on this thing
> off and on for a week 
> > and am getting pretty frustrated.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > G
> >
>



Reply via email to