Tomahawk sandbox subForm (and probably others like Trinidad's subForm) will allow you to do validation grouping like you've specified below.
On 3/19/07, Hasan Turksoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Sounds like your doing some creating stuff with the validator. Yes, i've customized so many parts at both shale-validator and commons-validator jars... our project needs urgent validation requirements.. so, i have injected some extra solutions into framework.. nowadays i'm working on validating only some specific(grouped) fields for only some specific submits.. This means; for instance, a combo will only validate A,B,C fields while another button(in the same form) will validate only E,F,G fields... This is a hard requirement :).. and needs core changes at framework.. that's why i have to track and hold all my changes strictly and go parallel with original shale code at the same time... best regards, hasan... On 3/17/07, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > >From: "Hasan Turksoy" < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > i have implemented a workaround for this serverside required problem... > > shortly: if validatorscript sets the required attribute, as you say, JSF > > won't call my serverside validator when that field's value is empty... > to > > overcome this, i've commented the validatorscript's required attribute > > setting code.. this means JSF can't see that field as required and not > call > > any required validator for that field... So, how can we call serverside > > required validators? I've implemented an > > idea from myfaces wiki.. > > > > Implementation in short; i have developed an > > RequiredValidatorChecker component.. it traverses all the component tree > and > > calls validate methods for found required validators... > > i have entered a blog about this solution... > > > > So, you can think that serverside required validations are being called > when > > needed... > > > > In fact, the problem is ConverterHelper can not handle array/list types > in > > current situation... although i can't think of any such scenario, > somehow a > > validation may be necessary to validate an array/list value.. so, how > should > > it work in this case? (May be such a scenario is not possible ;) ) > > > > Shale Clay has an example of using a converter for string arrays[1][2]. > > I don't understand your problem with the validators. I think I would have > > tried using the "immediate" flag on the commands to stop short of > validation. > Or, looked at one of tomahawk or trinidad's subform components but you > might have a complex layout that won't let you do that. > > Sounds like your doing some creating stuff with the validator. > > [1] > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/shale/framework/trunk/shale-clay/src/main/java/org/apache/shale/clay/convert/StringArrayConverter.java?view=markup > [2] > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/shale/framework/trunk/shale-clay/src/main/resources/META-INF/faces-config.xml?view=markup > > > > Hasan... > > > > > > On 3/16/07, Gary VanMatre wrote: > > > > > > > > > The server-side "required" commons validator rule is kind of bogus. > I've > > > only seen it useful > > > for client side validation. This is because JSF requires a value > before > > > it will even invoke > > > the server side validation logic. A component's validator will not be > > > invoked if the component doesn't have a value. There is a separate > > > "required" attribute for components that are EditableValueHolders. > > > > > > The shale ValidatorScript component, that must be added at the end of > the > > > page, looks through the component tree and toggles on the required > attribute > > > for components that include the shale commons validator required > server side > > > rule. So, the ValidatorScript component is needed even if you are only > > > using sever side rules. > > > > > > Gary
