I agree with both of you! Not having JavaScript implementation shouldn't be an issue - if people want it then someone would come up with it.
However, because the approach I took was to modify the exiting number validations (byte, short, long, integer, float, double) then it means that where there is JavaScript validation (not all of them seem to have) these will now fail if a pattern is used, because they don't take into account the pattern. I would put some additional time on this, if a committer was willing to implement it. But since David Graham has said he is -1 on this, doesn't that effectively make this enhacement request dead? Niall Richard Hightower wrote ... > I agree about that sticky wicket, but.... > > There are already validation rules that do not have client-side support (via > JavaScript). > > At least this type of stuff would be nice in the contrib area. > Ted Husted wrote ... > In principle, I'd agree with Rick, since these type of patterns are the > standard way of doing this sort of thing on the Java platform. > > But, the sticky wicket is lack of a JavaScript implementation. People would > expect an implementation like this to include client-side support, as the > other validations do. > > -Ted. > > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 20:54:17 -0700, Richard Hightower wrote: > > Niall, > > > > > > I don't get a vote. I am not a committer. But if I did.... I would > > vote +1 on the idea (I have not studied your implementation). I can > > write regular expressions in a pinch, but why not support all of > > the java.text.* in the validator rules (including currencey). I > > like the idea. > > > > Rick Hightower > > Developer > > > > > > Struts/J2EE training -- http://www.arc-mind.com/strutsCourse.htm > > Struts/J2EE consulting -- http://www.arc- > > mind.com/consulting.htm#StrutsMentoring > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Niall Pemberton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 5:38 PM To: Struts Developers List > > Subject: Re: Validating Formatted Numbers Patch [Bugzilla 26151] > > > > > > OK so how can it be done with mask? > > > > > > also, it doesn't get more basic than numbers...if it can be done > > with mask, but its complicated, doesn't ease of use cut any ice? > > > > Niall > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: > > Thursday, January 15, 2004 10:19 PM > > Subject: Re: Validating Formatted Numbers Patch [Bugzilla 26151] > > > > > >> The point of having the mask validation is so we don't have to > >> support all variations of patterns. I'm -1 on adding validators > >> that duplicate what can already be done with mask. > >> > >> David > >> > >> > >> --- Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> Robert, > >>> > >>> > >>> I tried to get mask to work (although until today I had no > >>> knowledge of regular expressions) using the ORA demonstration > >>> applet and I couldn't get it to (including your suggestion). > >>> > >>> I'm not saying regular expressions couldn't work (only I don't > >>> know how to > >>> make them!), but the pattern's used in DecimalFormat are so > >>> much more straight forward and designed for the task. Typically > >>> as people are probably > >>> using a pattern with DecimalFormat to output the data to > >>> screen, it then is > >>> much easier and intuitive to specify the same pattern for > >>> validation. > >>> > >>> > >>> I say horses for courses and to me using a number pattern to > >>> validate numbers is a better way to do it - hence the > >>> enhacement request: > >>> > >>> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26151 > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> > >>> > >>> Niall > >>> > >>> > >>>> Robert Leland wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> So using mask won't work ? (my syntax below is probably not > >>>> correct) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> <field property="amount" depends="required,mask"> > >>>> <arg0 key="sale.amount" /> > >>>> <var> > >>>> <var-name>mask</var-name> > >>>> <var-value>\d,\d\d0\:\(\d,\d\d0\)</var-value> </var> </field> > >>>> > >>> > >>> I need to validate numbers which are formatted and have posted > >>> a patch to > >>> bugzilla which enhances validator the existing number > >>> validations to do this. > >>> > >>> This patch allows an optional "numberPattern" variable to be > >>> specified for > >>> the existing byte, short, integer, long, float and double > >>> validations. For Example: > >>> > >>> <field property="amount" depends="required,integer"> <arg0 > >>> key="sale.amount" /> <var> <var-name>numberPattern</var-name> > >>> <var-value>#,##0:(#,##0)</var-value> </var> </field> > >>> > >>> If the pattern is specified, then java.text.DecimalFormat is > >>> used to parse > >>> the number and check if it is valid (catering for Locale). > >>> > >>> > >>> I have also posted a patch to add a new section the Validator > >>> User Guide which describes all the standard suppiled > >>> validations and shows examples of > >>> usage, including using the new "numberPattern" variable. > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks in advance for any feedback. > >>> > >>> > >>> Niall > >>> > >>> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> ----- To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev- > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >> __________________________________ > >> Do you Yahoo!? > >> Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes > >> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> --- To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev- > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]