M
> To: Struts Developers List
> Subject: Re: Validator Design Questions
>
>
> This is precisely my motivation: get Struts out of validation
> directly,
> making it easier to re-use commons-validator deeper in the business
> layer. Struts should be able to utilize validations, b
elopers List
Subject: RE: Validator Design Questions
What does "currently constituted" mean?
David
--- Edgar P Dollin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I for one would never use struts validator as it is currently
constituted
and to be required to use it would cause me to drop usi
t: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 9:00 AM
> To: Struts Developers List
> Subject: RE: Validator Design Questions
>
>
> What does "currently constituted" mean?
>
> David
>
> --- Edgar P Dollin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I for one would never use struts
is idea.
>
> Thanks
>
> Edgar
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Don Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 12:46 PM
> > To: Struts Developers List
> > Subject: Re: Validator Design Questions
> >
> >
> >
Then I misunderstood. My apologies.
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 5:43 PM
> To: Struts Developers List
> Subject: Re: Validator Design Questions
>
>
> I'm not understanding your objection. I
drop using struts. Please
rethink this idea.
Thanks
Edgar
-Original Message-
From: Don Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 12:46 PM
To: Struts Developers List
Subject: Re: Validator Design Questions
Ok, good, then there is nothing obvious I'm missing. I think
i
plus 1
-Original Message-
From: Edgar P Dollin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 2:28 PM
To: 'Struts Developers List'
Subject: RE: Validator Design Questions
I for one would never use struts validator as it is currently constituted
and to be required to us
6 PM
> To: Struts Developers List
> Subject: Re: Validator Design Questions
>
>
> Ok, good, then there is nothing obvious I'm missing. I think
> it would be
> a good goal for Struts to use validator completely and not
> require its
> own validators, and I w
Ok, good, then there is nothing obvious I'm missing. I think it would be
a good goal for Struts to use validator completely and not require its
own validators, and I will look into that. As for the loading of
validators, yes, I'll take that over to commons-dev.
Don
David Graham wrote:
--- Don B
--- Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 3:16 PM -0400 5/20/04, Don Brown wrote:
> >With the validator as a constant source of hangups, I'm working on
> >becoming more familiar with how it works. I have some questions,
> >perhaps rather basic and obvious:
> >
> >Why does Struts perform
--- Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With the validator as a constant source of hangups, I'm working on
> becoming more familiar with how it works. I have some questions,
> perhaps rather basic and obvious:
>
> Why does Struts perform all its validation with o.a.s.v.CheckFields? It
>
>
At 3:16 PM -0400 5/20/04, Don Brown wrote:
With the validator as a constant source of hangups, I'm working on
becoming more familiar with how it works. I have some questions,
perhaps rather basic and obvious:
Why does Struts perform all its validation with o.a.s.v.CheckFields?
It seems it dupl
With the validator as a constant source of hangups, I'm working on
becoming more familiar with how it works. I have some questions,
perhaps rather basic and obvious:
Why does Struts perform all its validation with o.a.s.v.CheckFields? It
seems it duplicates a most of commons-validator's, well
13 matches
Mail list logo
