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=22687>. 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=22687 Indexed Property Validation - javascript & non-javascript Summary: Indexed Property Validation - javascript & non- javascript Product: Struts Version: 1.1RC2 Platform: All OS/Version: Other Status: NEW Severity: Major Priority: Other Component: Validator Framework AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] When an indexed property is validated (which apparently cannot happen at all for javascript validations - I checked the CVS), only one error is identified for each validation type. There should be an error for each bad field. With the current implementation, there is no way for the user to identify the source of the problem since it could be any one (or more) of the repeating items. The comment in the javascript tag that indicates why there is no javascript for this case indicates that the messages can't be identified. The right thing to do seems to be either to give an error parm that is the field string itself. The other choice seems to me to be that you could specify a identification property in the xml that shows which item is failing. For example, suppose an indexed object (using nested tags) has a property called lastName that is being validated. If it is required and missing, there is nothing to put in the message. But if there is a field in the iterator that is generated, account number or indexid (at worst), then that could be specified to be placed in the error message. No matter what, it does not seem fair to make the user fix the same error with additional round-trips when we have obviously already analyzed the error for all of the iterations. Wayne --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
