Hi John,
this has been implemented and been released:
http://rifers.org/wiki/display/RIFE/Meta+data+merging
The same meta data (constraints) is used by everything RIFE-related,
including CRUD.
Best regards,
Geert
On 10 May 2006, at 20:58, JohnT wrote:
Stefan <rife <at> m42.de> writes:
Hi Geert,
yes, that seems clear by your example. Nevertheless I am currently
thinking about pros and cons of a repository. Though this has not
been
used in your examples I could think of the need for different
validations for one single pojo.
Your default way would either be the current way it is
implemented in
rife or
an optional (and direct) relationship between
com.mypackage.ThisPojo and
com.mypackage.ThisPojoMetaData
But think of different users with different rights. One who could
enter
a new data object and one who may modify everything (e.g. admin).
Though
this could be achieved by if statements it would be an option if
validation A would allow to enter anything but the mId in your
example
and validation B would allow to alter that mID also.
Please note that this is just an idea. Maybe that will not be
required
by any real world applications but is an option that would let me
prefer
a repository to alter the default settings. So if such an entry does
exist that one will be taken otherwise the default behaviour will
be used.
I'm a little late to the thread here, but this is exactly what I am
looking at
now (domain objects as true POJOs).
Was anything like this ever implemented?
I think you would want three levels, two of which you have already
alluded to:
- A simple configuuration option that causes the framework to
attempt to find
PojoMetaData, based on a naming convention, in the classpath.
- Configuration to explicitly map specific pojo and metadata objects.
- Configuration option to specify a "MetaDataFactory"
implementation that
takes a class and some context information and returns a
ValidatedConstrained
impl. I agree with Stefan on the need for different validations in
different
contexts, like user or different views on the same pojo (e.g. multi-
page
form). In most cases you could rely on one of the simpler
approaches, but can
get fancy when necessary.
Also, while I'm here, I just want to make sure... can the same meta
data be
used for form validation and for CRUD? So that one can start with
CRUD and
add custom UIs with minimal recoding of the business logic.
Thanks.
- JT
_______________________________________________
Rife-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.uwyn.com/mailman/listinfo/rife-users
--
Geert Bevin Uwyn bvba GTalk: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Use what you need" Avenue de Scailmont 34 Skype: gbevin
http://www.uwyn.com 7170 Manage, Belgium AIM: geertbevin
gbevin at uwyn dot com Tel: +32 64 84 80 03 Mobile: +32 477 302 599
PGP Fingerprint : 4E21 6399 CD9E A384 6619 719A C8F4 D40D 309F D6A9
Public PGP key : available at servers pgp.mit.edu, wwwkeys.pgp.net
_______________________________________________
Rife-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.uwyn.com/mailman/listinfo/rife-users
