Well, there are just some places where the two have to mix. Any way you slice it you are going to have to figure if something went wrong (the logic) and what to do to tell the user (the presentation). I think doing this in the MarkupWriters is about as good a spot as any. It keeps it generic enough that you don't have to know what exactly went wrong, but you still get to 'tell' the user about it.
There would be other ways to do it, such as a conditional that would change the CSS styles or something like that, but why? -Nick On 6/29/05, Rhys Causey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: June 29, 2005 7:00:38 PM EDT (CA) > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [Eng] Tapestry and ValidationDelegate > > Reply-To: Engineering Email Alias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > Hi, > > So I've read the chapter in `Tapestry in Action' explaining the use of > > ValidationDelegate. The explained method of modifying the rendered > > components (i.e. to highlight an input box red) seems really > > awkward in > > the sense that this is done using the IMarkupWriter within the > > writeSuffix, Prefix, Attributes, LabelSuffix, and LabelPrefix. I find > > this contradicts the main goals of Tapestry and it's ideas of > > separating > > logic (java objects) and presentation (html templates). > > > > Is there another method? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Eng mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.technolog.ca/mailman/listinfo/eng > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
