Hadn't heard that myself, but I'm using the 1.2 Nightly and have no deprecation warnings for DynaValidatorActionForms. I thought it was just that formsets would inherit the declarations "above" them.
Anyway, I don’t see how it would make ValidatorActionForms unnecessary. If I have a FormX which is FormY with field A removed, field B added, and (most importantly) field C validated differently, how is inheritance going to help me? Since I'd be calling them from different actions anyway, the way I'd do it now is to use a [Dyna]ValidatorActionForm form with everyone the fields defined and different rules defined for each action. > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Hardy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 1:16 PM > To: Struts Users Mailing List > Subject: Re: Validator Framework > > > I thought ValidatorActionForm was going to be deprecated > because the new > form configuration functionality allows validation form > inheritance and > therefore makes the 'definition by action' redundant, since > it becomes > totally simple to define new forms without repeated heaps of fields. > > On 04/20/2004 04:39 PM Joe Hertz wrote: > > Based on what Hubert said, the confusion I initially > encountered was > > 180 from what apparently is typical. I thought everything wanted to > > know about an Action, html:form's, etc :-/ > > > > I think the moment a form class got created whose name > didn't end with > > "ActionForm", problems were bound to show up.. > > > > Anyway, The logic I think currently goes like this- > > > > [Dyna]ValidatorActionForms validate based upon the Action. > > [Dyna]ValidatorForms validate based upon the Form. > > > > What they should have been in the first place IMHO- > > > > [Dyna]ActionValidatorForm and [Dyna]FormValidatorForm > > > > Or (yeah, cumbersome but more consistent with everything > else being an > > "XXXActionForm"): > > > > [Dyna]ActionValidatorActionForm and [Dyna]FormValidatorActionForm. > > > > But since they werent created that way, with deprecations, > this would > > be REALLY CONFUSING(tm), so I'd suggest replacing "Validator" with > > "Validation" in all of the above suggestions :-) > > > > -Joe > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Hubert Rabago [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 9:41 AM > >>To: Struts Users Mailing List > >>Subject: Re: Validator Framework > >> > >> > >> > >>--- Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>>Let's try a quick poll -- are these better names? > >>> > >>>NameDynaValidatorForm for DynaValidatorForm > >> > >>PathDynaValidatorForm for > >> > >>>DynaValidatorActionForm > >>> > >>>If so, we could deprecate the old names and put in new ones. > >>> > >>>If these aren't good, people are encouraged to suggest > better names. > >> > >>You can also consider changing only the > >>DynaValidatorActionForm, since IMHO that's the one that > >>causes the confusion, and DynaValidatorForm already works the > >>way other form beans do. > >> > >>Hubert > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>__________________________________ > >>Do you Yahoo!? > >>Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢ > > > > http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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] > > > > > > > -- > struts 1.2 + tomcat 5.0.19 + java 1.4.2 > Linux 2.4.20 Debian > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
