--- Rick Hightower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > David Graham et al. > > I can feel the train derailing off the tracks. Screeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeech! > For a moment let's pretend that I never mentioned BSF or Rhino. I want > to > get your collective thoughts on JSTL EL Validator Rule. > > JSTL EL Validator Rule (validatejstl) ------------------ > > What feedback do you have for the JSTL EL validator rule? > > David mentioned some disdain for Rhino/JavaScript. What about using JSTL > EL > to compare fields in a form for a rule? > > How do you think this approach compares to requiredif and validatewhen? > > OPTION REQUIREDIF > Is it better to create a complex and verbose set of options like > requiredif > to get rid of reliance on an expression language? (IMO very few folks > use > this because it is too complex) > > OPTION VALIDATEWHEN > Is it better to create a custom expression language just for validation > like > validatewhen? > > Would you prefer requiredif, validatewhen, or validatejstl to be part of > the > next version of Struts? Or none of them?
requiredif was released with 1.1, validwhen will be released with 1.2, I will -1 any other changes like this for 1.2 because we're too late in the cycle for something like this. Ted is already working on cutting 1.2 and nobody wants another 1.1 release cycle situation. > > Last I heard validatewhen will be part of the next release of Struts. I > think this JSTL EL Validator rule should be included instead. That's not how Struts works. James spent the time to test and commit validwhen and it will be released with 1.2. Whether or not it's deprecated sometime in the future is anybody's guess. > Creating > another expression language for this problem space does not make sense > when > a perfectly good expression language like JSTL EL is available. It does > not > make sense to maintain a second expression language when Jakarta already > has > JSTL, which is better and more mature. JSTL EL is pervasive, e.g., JSTL > EL > tags are recommended over legacy struts tags. > > I've received some feedback from a few struts users (clients and peers). > They love the idea of JSTL EL validator rule. It just makes so much > sense > and solves the problem of doing validation that involves relationships > between form fields. This is a hole in the validator framework that gets > filled quite nicely by validatejstl. The beauty of this is it is so > small. I agree that using the EL for validation makes sense for the reasons you stated. This would get Struts away from the restrictive requiredif rule and the ANTLR generated validwhen rule. Using the standard EL would be a Good Thing. However, Struts 1.1 is based on Servlet 2.2 which prevents the use of Servlet 2.3 features (the EL) in the standard distro. An EL based validation could live in the contrib directory along with the struts-el taglib. Re BSF, Rhino, and Jython: IMO, things like this don't belong in the standard Struts distro. The Struts Sourceforge site may be a good place for this. This type of functionality is quite removed from Struts' core competency. David > > Okay... I am changing tracks to a different conversation. > > > > > BSF Validator Rule -------------------- > > This is a separate issue from the JSTL EL Validator Rule. Perhaps this > could > be a separate conversation. > > Having a validate-bsf rule would not necessitate running Rhino... it > would > merely be an option. The validator framework would never have to start > Rhino (JavaScript), Jython (Python), JRuby (Ruby), or any scripting > language > unless the web application developer wanted to use this feature. > > I like the thought of Rhino because I could create scripts on the client > and > the server, and only have one set of validation scripts. I think this is > a > better alternative than having to maintain two sets of code that does > the > same thing in two languages. Again, this would be an option, not > required. > > ** More Comments below... > > Rick Hightower > Chief Technology Officer > Trivera Technologies > http://www.triveratech.com > 520 290 6855 (Phone) > 520 977 8605 (Mobile) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 6:51 AM > To: Struts Developers List > Subject: RE: JSTL EL Validator rule: A better requiredif and > validatewhen > using JSTL > > > I am using the JSTL EL Validator that I wrote, but not the BSF or OGNL > > ones > > I assume this plan involves running Rhino as the server side Javascript > engine? I don't think that's a good idea. > > **Why? Size? Performance? Overhead? What if Rhino was only an option (as > I > am suggesting)? Would you still be against Rhino if it is only an option > not > a requirement? > > Validator shouldn't have to > start up a Javascript engine on the server just to do some validations. > > ** I agree. This is why I never suggested such a thing. > ** It would not have to start JavaScript. This would be an *option*, it > would only start up JavaScript if you used the validate-javascript rule > (more likely validate-bsf). > > Javascript is a client side validation tool that's a convenience to > users. > > ** I agree. > > The real benefit from Validator is the server side checks it performs > which should remain in Java. > > ** I agree. This is an augmentation not a replacement. I am not > suggesting > the that validator framework have any dependence on JavaScript/Rhino. > This > would all be included and encapsulated in one validator rule. > > ** Hmmmm... what if you could do a simple expression like this.... > > form.passwordCheck != value > > Or something like this > > form.startDate < value > > and replace one ActionForm class (40+ lines of code). > > ** Less code to write means less code to maintain. > > ** I think JSTL EL and JavaScript are valid options for doing comparison > of > form fields. Using the BSF, the user could pick any Java scripting > language > (Bean Shell, Jython, JRuby or whatever). Duplication is evil. It would > be > nice to avoid duplication if possible. > > ** What were your thoughts on JSTL EL as an expression language for > doing > form field relationship comparisons? > > ** I'll come up with a proof of concept for BSF later. For now I would > love > to get your thoughts on JSTL EL. > > David > > <snip> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
