The only way that you will get that functionality right now is to switch
to the fulcrum version.  Within the next few days, it will should be
available in T 2.2 HEAD.  I have completed my work on the service.  I am
just waiting for scarab to become available so that I can post the
patches.

If you can wait, the new version will have updated docs (including an
updated and commented DTD).  Exception handling and reporting has also
been improved.  A few bug fixes have also been implemented.  If you look
through the messages on the list over the past 2 - 3 days, you will find
a more complete list of the changes being made.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jake Fear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 11:33 AM
> To: Turbine Users List
> Subject: Re: turbine 2.2 in CVS
> 
> 
> I am not seeing this behavior in my own application.  I 
> checked out from 
> the branch names TURBINE_2_2_BRANCH and the DateStringField does not 
> override the toString() method in that code line.  Perhaps I 
> am "barking 
> up the wrong branch." ;-)  Thinking this might be the case I also 
> grabbed the HEAD tag to see if it lived there.  No such luck. 
>  Can you 
> please tell me where I can grab this functionality.  It does 
> sound like 
> I would be reinventing the wheel for the most part.
> 
> Cheers,
> Jake
> 
> Quinton McCombs wrote:
> 
> >There is something close to this for the DateString field.  The
> >toString() method will use the first format rule for the field to 
> >format the date.  This is actually in the Fulcrum version 
> which I have 
> >just completed back porting to T2.2.
> >
> >What would be ideal is one definition (formatter/mask) that 
> is used for 
> >both validation and display.  This is what I really like 
> about the way 
> >that the DatString field is implemented.  It used the first 
> format mask 
> >for display.  You can still have other masks that will allow other 
> >formats for the input.
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Jake Fear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >>Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 2:09 AM
> >>To: Turbine Users List
> >>Subject: Re: turbine 2.2 in CVS
> >>
> >>
> >>I'm considering adding the capability to specify a formatter for a
> >>field.  I don't want to dupliate any effort.  Can you tell me 
> >>if anyone 
> >>else is working on such a feature already? It does not 
> appear like it 
> >>would be difficult, provided a few assumptions.
> >>1.) There is no need to have several formatters for a field, 
> >>one should 
> >>always suffice.
> >>2.) Specifying a formatter is optional.
> >>3.) If a formatter is specified, it will be used in the 
> >>toString() call 
> >>of the Field class.  If not formatter is specified, the 
> >>current behavior 
> >>will be used.
> >>
> >>I think this is a good way to remain backward compatible and have
> >>minimum impact on the API, while at the same time allow those 
> >>who want 
> >>to leverage the solution to do so with little or now code 
> >>change (they 
> >>may need to rip out any existing solutions to use this one).  The 
> >>implementation would be similar to that for rules, only 
> significantly 
> >>simpler.  I think this really completes the "Field" 
> abstraction, and 
> >>simplifies the writing of templates that must deal with dates, 
> >>currencies and the like.
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>Jake
> >>
> >>Quinton McCombs wrote:
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>The DTD is out of date.
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>From: Jake Fear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >>>>Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 1:55 AM
> >>>>To: Turbine Users List
> >>>>Subject: turbine 2.2 in CVS
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>I am building from the 2.2 branch in CVS.  Can anyone tell
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>me why the
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>displayName attribute of an intake group does not appear in the
> >>>>intake.dtd?  I actually rely on this attribute, and I am 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>concerned it
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>may be removed from future versions of the product.  Perhaps
> >>>>it is very 
> >>>>new and only appears in the code.   In any instance, I have 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>added it
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>myself, and the implementing code seems to work fine.
> >>>>
> >>>>Jake
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>--
> >>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> >>>><mailto:turbine-user-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>For
> >>>>additional commands,
> >>>>e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>--
> >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> >>>      
> >>>
> >><mailto:turbine-user-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>For
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>additional commands,
> >>e-mail: 
> >>    
> >>
> >>><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>
> >>--
> >>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> >><mailto:turbine-user-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>For
> >>additional commands, 
> >>e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:turbine-user-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >For 
> additional commands, 
> e-mail: 
> ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:turbine-user-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For 
> additional commands, 
> e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to