DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16401>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16401 ValidatorLookupDispatchAction Summary: ValidatorLookupDispatchAction Product: Struts Version: Nightly Build Platform: All URL: http://www.phase.ws/struts/ OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: Enhancement Priority: Other Component: Standard Actions AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I just put together a class that uses the Validator from within a LookupDispatchAction. The class could be easily included into the Struts distribution. It is very useful to have the validation available to call from within the DispatchAction because different methods require different validation. Anyways, I have heard others speak of Action based validation (Craig included). This is not as useful in regular actions because the mapping allows for the flexibility. But for those of us who use the Dispatch... this type of validation is uesful. The code should be ready to drop in with no changes. FYI - The class extends DispatchAction and uses the same code as the LookupDispatchAction. I took the validation code from the ValidatorActionForm and included it in the ValidatorLookupDispatchAction class with some minor changes. I also, abstracted the method lookup process into a method called "lookupMethod". This allows for the method name to be retrieved from within the extended ValidatorLookupDispatchAction class for other purposes or custom configurations that might be used. Basically, the key that is looked up in the validation.xml form name is the ActionMapping url plus a dot method name. (.i.e. /myAction.do.edit <- edit is the method name). -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
