On Wed, 2004-05-26 at 01:07, Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> On 26.05.2004 00:53, Benoit Deshaies wrote:
>
> > I looked at the sample you posted Vadim. I have a question and a
> > comment regarding validation using <fd:javascript>. In those JS
> > snippets, can you access the cocoon object (like session) and can you
> > load your own Java classes (Packages.com.xyz.Object)?
> >
> > And my comment is this: for simple forms, including the validation
> > rules such as which fields are required in the form definition itself
> > is probably fine. But on larger applications with complex validation
> > logic (think income tax report), people are likely to implement some
> > sort of external validator component. My concern is that by including
> > the validation code in the form definition, you're mixing the
> > presentation and business layer. In that respect, I preferred the
> > old-style JS validation function, which correctly put the business
> > logic out of the presentation layer.
>
> Nobody prevents you from doing it that way, you still can readd this for
> your use case.
Hmm, I don't think that's a valid remark. It's like saying "if you don't
like how cocoon works, you can rewrite it".
> But this is no longer the default way for doing simple
> field validation. It was really just only a javascript hack. Even for
> your business logic validation you can probably find better ways to
> handle it.
No no, you can still do it that way! Just like event listeners can both
be defined in the form definition and added on a widget instance, the
same can be done with validators. I agree with Benoit that this is an
essential feature.
See the interface Widget: it has the methods addValidator and
removeValidator, which take an object implementing the WidgetValidator
interface as argument. See the description of that interface on how a
WidgetValidator implementation is supposed to behave.
There is still one issue, which is that widget validators on parent
widgets are not executed if any of the validators on one of their child
widgets fails. Once this is changed, adding a WidgetValidator on a form
object would be the same as the earlier validator function, except that
now the validation will be part of normal form processing cycle and that
avoids a few problems. [this change is just a one line fix, and is
already agreed upon, but I haven't had time for this yet]
I posted earlier an example to the list on how to implement a Java
interface in javascript, or you can find that in the rhino docs also.
Alternatively, in the v3 api you can do widget.validator = function() {}
--
Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
