DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28152] New: - problem with wrapper and dofilter

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

RE: Splitting struts-config into multiple jar and read them as reso urce stream

> -Original Message- > From: Craig McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 2:00 AM > To: Struts Developers List > Subject: Re: Splitting struts-config into multiple jar and read them as > reso urce stream > > > nicolas De Loof wrote: > > > Just a detail I jus

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28150] - Refactor ValidatorForm to facilitate overriding Validation Key

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28150] - Refactor ValidatorForm to facilitate overriding Validation Key

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28150] New: - Refactor ValidatorForm to facilitate overriding Validation Key

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28148] - Url Validation Configuration Options

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: Fw: UrlValidator() takes options - but how?

Sorry I jumped the gun and have put up a patch without agreeing the variable names - if its not acceptable I can always change it and re-submit the patch. I have used the three options you mention (except mine are currently all lower case) and a fourth which is "schemes" and it can ccontain a comm

Validator Plugin

Currently the Validator PlugIn doesnât validate the XML file. I have updated it to remove the deprecated methods and to validate the XML files. Here is the question: Currently, the validator plugin fails by logging a message but doesnât take advantage of throwing an exception. I believe it shoul

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28148] - Url Validation Configuration Options

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28148] - Url Validation Configuration Options

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28148] New: - Url Validation Configuration Options

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: URL validation

The URLvalidator was actually designed to be a general URI validator. It's been a while since I used it but I believe it should be able to validate jdbc:oracle://localhost:3050/mydatabase ? I believe the scheme is optional. -Rob > -Original Message- > From: Richard Bywater [mailto:[EMA

Re: Fw: UrlValidator() takes options - but how?

> I was thinking of openning a bugzilla and sticking a patch up - but I don't > want > to steal your thunder if you'd rather do it. I would encourage a bugzilla ticket, it sounds like there is almost agreement on the needed changes, and options. Before fileing do try to firm up those options. Si

Something after RequestProcessor adding extra / to URL? (was: URL validation)

In another thread, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The way I read http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2396.html > section 3.3 > I don't believe the path segment can legally end with a '/'. > Read the RFC and see what you think. > So I don't believe http://www.google.com:80/?action=xyz > strictly speaking is val

Re: Fw: UrlValidator() takes options - but how?

Have you implemented it already? I have implemented about 3/4 of what we have discussed. I could stick a patch in bugzilla after finishing it off tomorrow, but if you've got the finished article, then you can spare me the work :) - I don't mind either way. I'm also looking at another part of th

Re: URL validation

If we're talking URLs aren't we looking at the wrong RFC? RFC1738 has this section: 3.3. HTTP The HTTP URL scheme is used to designate Internet resources accessible using HTTP (HyperText Transfer Protocol). The HTTP protocol is specified elsewhere. This specification only describes the

Re: Fw: UrlValidator() takes options - but how?

Adam Hardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > I was merely adopting the three optional configuration settings that are > used in UrlValidator already. I think your suggestion of a > comma-delimited list of schemas sounds easiest, plus it has precedents > in other config parameter settings, e.g. list of

Re: URL validation

I thought that a slash on the end of a web-address denoted that you were requesting the default resource at that URI. However I guess that is a very HTTP-centric point of view. So if the RFC leaves it open to interpretation, what does one do? Veer on the side of leniency? Adam On 04/01/2004

Re: Fw: UrlValidator() takes options - but how?

I was merely adopting the three optional configuration settings that are used in UrlValidator already. I think your suggestion of a comma-delimited list of schemas sounds easiest, plus it has precedents in other config parameter settings, e.g. list of roles in an action mapping. Re an 'all' op

Re: Fw: UrlValidator() takes options - but how?

Adam Hardy suggested "allow2slashes", "nofragments" and "allowallschemes" being either true/false I think rather than having "allowallschemes", have a "schemes" parameter which can be either "all" (which sets the allow all schemes option) or a comma delimited list of valid schemes. Alternatively

Re: Fw: UrlValidator() takes options - but how?

--- Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry this went to the wrong list, but anyway > > Looking at CVS there is a validateUrl() method in the Struts FieldChecks > class (added in version 1.15) - problem is it uses commons > GenericValidator > which has a static instance. > > What

Re: Fw: UrlValidator() takes options - but how?

Sorry this went to the wrong list, but anyway Looking at CVS there is a validateUrl() method in the Struts FieldChecks class (added in version 1.15) - problem is it uses commons GenericValidator which has a static instance. What do you think about changing this to instantiate a UrlValidator i

Re: Fw: UrlValidator() takes options - but how?

The url validation was added to commons validator but, as you're discovering, Struts doesn't directly support it yet. Struts should provide a hook into this new commons validator feature with predefined configuration variables like those that have been suggested below (just like how the maxlength

Fw: UrlValidator() takes options - but how?

sending this again as it appears to have lost its way! Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 5:09 PM > The problem with GenericValidator is that it has a single instance of > UrlValidator in a static variable, so you can't go changing its > configuration every time a url is validated in your webapp as

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28104] - Action mapping with wildcard should be search in the order of their declaration

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28104] - Action mapping with wildcard should be search in the order of their declaration

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28105] - Only one wildcard replacement by attribute?

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

cvs commit: jakarta-struts/src/test/org/apache/struts/config TestActionConfigMatcher.java

mrdon 2004/04/01 09:56:47 Modified:src/share/org/apache/struts/config ActionConfigMatcher.java src/test/org/apache/struts/config TestActionConfigMatcher.java Log: Added support for multiple wildcard replacements, added unit test to ensure co

Re: URL validation

Are you reading something into the spec? It seems like they are referring to a part of the URL. If not, I am wondering why the RFC shows examples in section E that do end in a slash. "In practice, URI are delimited in a variety of ways, but usually within double-quotes "http://test.com/";, angl

Re: URL validation

--- "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > From: Adam Hardy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2004 03:41 PM > > To: 'Struts Developers List' > > Subject: Re: URL validation > > > > On 03/15/2004 10:16 AM Adam Hardy wrote: > > > O

RE: Splitting struts-config into multiple jar and read them as reso urce stream

You both are right. Our project doesn't use struts validation and tiles, so I've not thought about it. Anyway, I could do a similar patch modifing: ValidatorPlugIn.initResources for validation.xml (just done) I18nFactorySet.parseXmlFile for tiles-def.xml (to be done) Is parseXmlFile the right m

Re: URL validation

> The way I read http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2396.html > section 3.3 > > I don't believe the path segment can legally end with a '/'. > Read the RFC and see what you think. > > So I don't believe http://www.google.com:80/?action=xyz > strictly speaking is valid, should we optionally allow for it >

Re: URL validation

> -Original Message- > From: Adam Hardy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2004 03:41 PM > To: 'Struts Developers List' > Subject: Re: URL validation > > On 03/15/2004 10:16 AM Adam Hardy wrote: > > On 03/13/2004 07:46 AM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >>> From: Adam H

Re: URL validation

On 03/15/2004 10:16 AM Adam Hardy wrote: On 03/13/2004 07:46 AM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Adam Hardy I provide URL validation on a page which saves links for users. I put together the latest build of commons-validator (1.1.2) and struts (1.2) to see what the URL validation is like. The clas

cvs commit: jakarta-struts/conf/share validator-rules.xml

rleland 2004/04/01 07:17:05 Modified:conf/share validator-rules.xml Log: remove extraneous '/>' from XML Revision ChangesPath 1.50 +3 -4 jakarta-struts/conf/share/validator-rules.xml Index: validator-rules.xml =

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27062] - warn that maxlength validator only active after physical upload (unfortunately not "fast-fail")

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: Splitting struts-config into multiple jar and read them as reso urce stream

nicolas De Loof wrote: Just a detail I just think about : Using this patch, web can develop a Struts module as a subproject and include it in WAR as a jar, but what's about tiles-def.xml and validation.xml ? I agree with your thinking ... if we concieve that a module should be "self configured