with JSF-2 this is now almost obsolete, isn't? JSF-2 has <f:validateBean> which works perfectly fine.
LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: Thomas Andraschko <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 5:31 PM > Subject: Re: DeltaSpike Roadmap > > Are you sure? PrimeFaces does not have one. I only know richfaces' > graphValidator and it's IMO not that easy and cool as s:validateForm. > > 2013/3/25 John D. Ament <[email protected]> > >> I believe all of the major JSF component libraries support some type of >> form validation using BV. >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Thomas Andraschko < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Any news about s:validateForm? >> > As i said, it's great feature of seam3 and would perfectly fit DS > (IMO). >> > >> > I could also add it to DS if no one have enough time... :) >> > >> > 2012/12/17 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> >> > >> > > there is a reason why it is just an add-on ;) >> > > and yes, if you would do it with the jsf2-api, it would be a bit >> easier. >> > > but you can use this add-on also for jsf 1.x and some users who > don't >> > like >> > > to use seam are happy with it. >> > > however, i just mentioned it as an example to show that cdi > isn't >> needed >> > to >> > > implement such a functionality. >> > > >> > > regards, >> > > gerhard >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > 2012/12/17 Lincoln Baxter, III <[email protected]> >> > > >> > > > Also, note that the use-cases for <s:validateForm> and > the latter >> > example >> > > > are different in their usage. IMO, <s:validateForm> is > much more >> > > > declarative and simple than the example provided from > extval. >> > > > >> > > > Just write a validator and attach it like you would normal > to a >> > component >> > > > in the view, wherever you want to use it. You can also > re-use >> > > > form-validators using this method, instead of using some (in > my >> > opinion) >> > > > strange view-filtering logic in the FormValidator > annotation. >> > > > >> > > > <s:validateForm> is/was one of the most well recieved > feature of Seam >> > > > Faces, and I think it deserves serious consideration. Can > you do form >> > > > validation other ways? absolutely, but this way is pretty > compelling >> > > based >> > > > on the feedback we got. It also ties in very normally with > the way in >> > > which >> > > > JSF handles validation and components, which is not > something that I >> > can >> > > > speak about with regard to extval, but I can say that seam > faces does >> > > this >> > > > nicely. >> > > > >> > > > ~Lincoln >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Thomas Andraschko < >> > > > [email protected]> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > Please do not mix both :) >> > > > > We had the discussion about commons bv constrains. > s:validateForm >> is >> > > > > completely different compared to bv constraints. >> > > > > s:validateForm does not fit the project for common bv > constraints. >> > > > > >> > > > > 2012/12/17 Karl Kildén <[email protected]> >> > > > > >> > > > > > Looks really nice I understand finally :-) >> > > > > > >> > > > > > In retrospect I don't know why I didn't > check the docs myself, >> > > probably >> > > > > > because I read most of the discussion on the phone > to begin with. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I then agree with the many suggestions regarding > doing it as a >> > > parallel >> > > > > > project. Perhaps that module could have a sub > module for CDI >> users >> > > > that >> > > > > > included producers and such. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Best regards / Karl >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > 2012/12/17 Gerhard Petracek > <[email protected]> >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > hi karl, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > it's implemented via a producer - see > [1]. >> > > > > > > but you don't really need cdi for it - > see e.g. [2]. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > regards, >> > > > > > > gerhard >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > [1] http://s.apache.org/ury >> > > > > > > [2] >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > http://os890.blogspot.co.at/2010/06/multi-field-form-validation-with-jsr.html >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 2012/12/17 Thomas Andraschko > <[email protected]> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > As far as i understand, validateAll just > validates all >> > components >> > > > but >> > > > > > you >> > > > > > > > can't use custom logic. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Checkout the seam docu here: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > http://docs.jboss.org/seam/3/faces/latest/reference/en-US/html/components.html >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > 2012/12/17 Karl Kildén > <[email protected]> >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hrmm still not sure I understand. > First off didn't Pete >> just >> > > say >> > > > it >> > > > > > was >> > > > > > > > > just a JSF-validator? It also > sounds and reads just like >> > > > > validateAll >> > > > > > > from >> > > > > > > > > omnifaces? >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > What is lacking that you would like > to see solved by CDI? >> And >> > > is >> > > > > it a >> > > > > > > > > natural fit for CDI extensions > rather then BV / JSF >> > extensions? >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Best regards / Karl >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > 2012/12/17 Thomas Andraschko > <[email protected]> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Hi, >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > they are nice but i can't > see a replacement for >> > > s:validateForm. >> > > > > > > > > > IMO s:validateForm is really a > simple solution for >> > > cross-field >> > > > > > > > > validation, >> > > > > > > > > > which is CDI based. >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Regards, >> > > > > > > > > > THomas >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > 2012/12/17 Karl Kildén > <[email protected]> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Well these are the > validators from omnifaces as per my >> > > > previous >> > > > > > > > > > > recommendation: >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > - > RequiredCheckboxValidator< >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > https://showcase-omnifaces.rhcloud.com/showcase/validators/RequiredCheckboxValidator.xhtml >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > - validateAll< >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > https://showcase-omnifaces.rhcloud.com/showcase/validators/validateAll.xhtml >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > - > validateAllOrNone< >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > https://showcase-omnifaces.rhcloud.com/showcase/validators/validateAllOrNone.xhtml >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > - validateEqual< >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > https://showcase-omnifaces.rhcloud.com/showcase/validators/validateEqual.xhtml >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > - validateOne< >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > https://showcase-omnifaces.rhcloud.com/showcase/validators/validateOne.xhtml >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > - > validateOneOrMore< >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > https://showcase-omnifaces.rhcloud.com/showcase/validators/validateOneOrMore.xhtml >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > - > validateOneOrNone< >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > https://showcase-omnifaces.rhcloud.com/showcase/validators/validateOneOrNone.xhtml >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > - validateOrder< >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > https://showcase-omnifaces.rhcloud.com/showcase/validators/validateOrder.xhtml >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > - validateUnique >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > < >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > https://showcase-omnifaces.rhcloud.com/showcase/validators/validateUnique.xhtml >> > > > > > > > > > > >Best >> > > > > > > > > > > regards / Karl >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > 2012/12/17 Thomas > Andraschko < >> > [email protected]> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > PrimeFaces > doesn't have such a component/utility. >> > > > > > > > > > > > Also AFAICS it's > based on CDI, so IMO DeltaSpike is a >> > > good >> > > > > > place >> > > > > > > > for >> > > > > > > > > > it. >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > 2012/12/17 Jason > Porter <[email protected]> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 17, > 2012 at 4:54 AM, Pete Muir < >> > > > > [email protected] >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 17 Dec > 2012, at 08:55, Gerhard Petracek wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hi > karl, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > #1 > apache myfaces (extval) doesn't implement >> jsr >> > > 303 >> > > > > > (e.g. >> > > > > > > > > apache >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bval > implements it) >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > #2 > there is no agreement that ds is only >> backend >> > > > > oriented >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > gerhard >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2012/12/17 Karl Kildén <[email protected]> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Hi Thomas, fellow user here. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > BV is as you may know specified in JSR-303. It >> > has >> > > > > great >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > implementations by >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > myfaces and hibernate that you can find >> easily. >> > > Thus >> > > > > > this >> > > > > > > > will >> > > > > > > > > > not >> > > > > > > > > > > > be >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > implemented in deltaspike afaik. However >> > providing >> > > > > some >> > > > > > > > common >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > constraints >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > beyond the specification sounds like a good >> > idea. >> > > > Note >> > > > > > > that >> > > > > > > > in >> > > > > > > > > > the >> > > > > > > > > > > > > mean >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > while @Email is almost trivial to implement >> > > yourself >> > > > > if >> > > > > > > you >> > > > > > > > > > search >> > > > > > > > > > > > it >> > > > > > > > > > > > > a >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > little. JSR-303 is highly extensible just like >> > > CDI. >> > > > > The >> > > > > > > > > > > > implementation >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > you >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > choose might have it as an extra already. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > For frontend extras I can't say I see an >> obvious >> > > > home >> > > > > in >> > > > > > > > > > > deltaspike >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > (someone correct me if I am wrong about this). >> > > But I >> > > > > > think >> > > > > > > > for >> > > > > > > > > > now >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Deltaspike is more backend oriented. I >> recommend >> > > > > having >> > > > > > a >> > > > > > > > look >> > > > > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > omnifaces >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > that already provide several great custom >> > > > > jsf-validators >> > > > > > > and >> > > > > > > > > has >> > > > > > > > > > > an >> > > > > > > > > > > > > open >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > request for users to ask for additional ones. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > best regards / Karl >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > 2012/12/16 Thomas Andraschko < >> > > > > > [email protected] >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Hi, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> is there a roadmap available for all upcoming >> > > > > features? >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Will there also be a BV module in the future? >> > > Will >> > > > it >> > > > > > > also >> > > > > > > > > > > include >> > > > > > > > > > > > > some >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> commons constraints like Email? >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, I > think this could be a good thing for a >> > > parallel >> > > > > > > project >> > > > > > > > to >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > DeltaSpike > actually - a library of BV constraints >> > not >> > > > > > branded >> > > > > > > > by >> > > > > > > > > a >> > > > > > > > > > > > > specific >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > impl. > I've cc'd Emmanuel, spec lead for BV, to >> see >> > if >> > > > he >> > > > > > has >> > > > > > > > any >> > > > > > > > > > > plans >> > > > > > > > > > > > > for >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > thing. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> What about the Seam s:validateForm? IMO it's >> a >> > > > simple >> > > > > > way >> > > > > > > > for >> > > > > > > > > > > cross >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > field >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> validation. Will this be added in future >> > > releases? >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is > not actually a BV validator, but a JSF >> > > > > validator. I >> > > > > > > > know >> > > > > > > > > > Mark >> > > > > > > > > > > > is >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > working on > JSF stuff for DeltaSpike atm, perhaps >> > this >> > > > is >> > > > > > > > > something >> > > > > > > > > > > > Jason >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > could add > to that. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this > something that belongs in DeltaSpike, or >> > should >> > > > it >> > > > > be >> > > > > > > in >> > > > > > > > a >> > > > > > > > > > JSF >> > > > > > > > > > > > > component > library? I know RichFaces has something >> > very >> > > > > > > similar, I >> > > > > > > > > > > believe >> > > > > > > > > > > > > PrimeFaces does > as well (haven't looked for a >> while) >> > > and >> > > > I >> > > > > > have >> > > > > > > > no >> > > > > > > > > > idea >> > > > > > > > > > > > > about other > component libraries. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> How can i contribue to DeltaSpike? I could do >> > > some >> > > > > > > smaller >> > > > > > > > > > tasks >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > without >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> problems. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> I also implemented constraints like >> > > > > > > > > > EqualsExpression("#{...}"). >> > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > this >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> could be useful for other users, too. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > This page > should help - >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > http://deltaspike.staging.apache.org/deltaspike/community.html >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Best regards, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Thomas >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Jason Porter >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://twitter.com/lightguardjp >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Software > Engineer >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Open Source > Advocate >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > PGP key id: > 926CCFF5 >> > > > > > > > > > > > > PGP key > available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Lincoln Baxter, III >> > > > http://ocpsoft.org >> > > > "Simpler is better." >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >
