That's true, but you could check the param map and see if there's
anything not allowed in there and add errors... Which, with the
DefaultWorkflowInterceptor, would cause the Action not to execute. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cameron Braid [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 11:20 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] formbean vs. action
> 
> 
> I thought that the validator interceptor executed after the 
> params interceptor.. How does this field validator prevent 
> the params interceptor from setting the params ?
> 
> Another way to do it is to use a comma delimited list of 
> allowed, or disallowed expressions for the params interceptor 
> to use on a per action basis.
> 
> This makes it hard to use interceptor stacks ... Though it 
> could be simplified by the introduction of a new 
> <interceptor-param> tag :
> 
> <action name="UpdateInvoice" class="...">
> 
>       <result.../>
>       <interceptor-ref name="defaultStack"/>
>       <interceptor-param ref="params" 
> name="disallowed">invoice.balance</interceptor-param>
> 
> </action>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
> Behalf Of Jason Carreira
> Sent: Friday, 19 September 2003 12:52 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] formbean vs. action
> 
> 
> Sounds like a good one... Especially since you could use the 
> same Action with different validations to block some params 
> in some situations and other parameters in others...
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tracy Snell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 9:49 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] formbean vs. action
> > 
> > 
> > On 9/18/03 3:59 AM, "Matt Ho" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > > Another method which might also work, but is a little more heavy 
> > > handed is to write a custom TypeConverter for fields you
> > want to mark
> > > as hidden.  For example, if I balance is reserved for 
> internal use 
> > > only, I could write a Type converted that threw away and 
> user data 
> > > that attempted to set balance.
> > 
> > I added a ProhibitedFieldValidator for another method. If 
> folks think 
> > it's a good idea I'll write the unit tests and submit it.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> > Welcome to geek heaven.
> > http://thinkgeek.com/sf 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
> > 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf 
> _______________________________________________
> Opensymphony-webwork mailing list 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf 
> _______________________________________________
> Opensymphony-webwork mailing list 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
> 


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork

Reply via email to