+1 on BOTH from me too regards Alexander
> -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Marinschek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 8:27 AM > To: MyFaces Discussion > Subject: Re: Faces Trace > > +1 for a global setting > > +1 for a possibility to override the global setting with a local > validator setting... > > regards, > > Martin > > On 4/19/06, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Shale comes with it's own validators that can do both > client side and server > > side. Each validator has flags like client="true" server="true". The > > disadvantage is that client side validation uses popus that > is not favored > > much. > > > > A central mechanism to control validation setting should be > good but also it > > would be flexible if a validator can override the global setting. > > > > > > On 4/19/06, Alexandre Poitras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > And you might check what Struts Shale already does. From > what I know > > > it integrates commons-validator. > > > > > > On 4/18/06, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I guess the optimal solution is as follows; > > > > > > > > Client side validation feature is added to Tomahawk and Sandbox > > validators > > > > using an attribute(client="true"). If this flag is true > then validation > > > > takes place at client otherwise regular server side > validation happens. > > > > There should be other attributes to customize the > client validation like > > > > enablePopup, highlight and etc. > > > > > > > > What do you think? I'm eagerly waiting to create > patches that would > > enable > > > > these validators to validate at client side. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Cagatay > > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/18/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On 4/18/06, Martin Marinschek < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > > > > > That's the other thing I'd like to have - automatic > client-side > > > > > > validation happening with the server side > validation in place. It > > > > > > would be good to have something like a hook in the extended > > validators > > > > > > - with this hook, they are asked to render out > their client-side > > > > > > validation javascript. > > > > > > > > > > > > Using this, separate validators wouldn't be necessary. > > > > > > > > > > Exactly. > > > > > > > > > > > Still, I think that the rendering question is very > important. In the > > > > > > current state when working with ADF, I wished I > could disable client > > > > > > side validation in ADF faces alltogether (I'm sure > there is a way to > > > > > > do so, didn't look deeper into it so far). The > popup box is just not > > > > > > context sensitive enough. > > > > > > > > > > Yep, you can disable it altogether - there's a > WEB-INF/web.xml flag. > > > > > > > > > > -- Adam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Alexandre Poitras > > > Québec, Canada > > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >
