Hi Christofer
On 13 Jul 2008, at 13:13, Christofer Dutz wrote:
When I was working on my first attempts to do exactly what you are
trying to
do (CForms using dojo 1.1 and client side validation), I ran into
exactly
the same problem as you did. I too think it would be easily possible
to
implement client and server-side validation using dojo. Even if it
would not
be possible to implement all.
Unfortunately the fi-output is hard-coded into the widget class
implementation and no validation information is sent. Making client-
side
validation work, it would make it necessary to patch every single
Widget
class to output this validation-data, but should be easy to
accomplish.
I stopped my work on this, since I had doubt's anyone would be
interested in
a feature like this and the thought of having to maintain patches
for so
many classes let me drop that idea.
I had a look as well and did not fancy ploughing in to the code to add
this right now, as I have so much else to do before I can release the
client-side stuff (hence asking for volunteers .... )
What I am working on in the meantime is using the (existing)
<fi:datatype base="string|integer|long|double|float|decimal"/> tags to
perform basic datatype validation on the client. My hope is that
adding support for this now, will make it easier to add fuller
validation client-side in the future.
BTW. Christofer, I attempted to contact you earlier about the private
work you said you had been doing on Dojo 1.1, to see if I could roll
it into my work. If you are interested in contributing, please contact
me off-list.
Many thanks
regards Jeremy
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Jeremy Quinn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2008 17:17
An: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Betreff: Client-side validation in CForms
Hi All
As you may know, I am working heavily on the revamp of Dojo on the
client-side of CForms.
In Dojo it is possible to perform quite a lot of validation on form
fields. There is a partial match between the validation capabilities
of CForms and those of Dojo. Several people have thought in the past
that it would be good to have the same validation occur on both the
server and the client.
OTTOMH, the kind of validators we could probably make work in both
places would be :
email, length, mod10, range and regexp (plus maybe javascript, if we
can sort out any context differences)
ATM however, no validation information is output by the form
generation process. Datatypes are there (which I can initially use)
but no validation.
So my question is, would someone volunteer to either add the
definition's validation tags to the output or help work out the
cleanest approach to adding it?
Many thanks
regards Jeremy
