Re: [Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-11-07 Thread Sven Meier
Hello Juergen, maybe it shouldn't - but currently it does ;). I debugged the new algorithm of ComponentStringResourceLoader today. As I already suspected, the id of the validated component is duplicated in the prefixKey, since both DefaultValidatorResourceKeyFactory and

Re: [Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-11-07 Thread Juergen Donnerstag
It works on my side. I created unit tests and I think they are ok. I enabled logging for the package and it doesn't happen. I tested the formInput example and it works without changes. Did you update AbstractValidator as well? Juergen On 11/7/05, Sven Meier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello

Re: [Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-11-07 Thread Juergen Donnerstag
yes, that is a bug Juergen On 11/8/05, Ingram Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I check out latest CVS HEAD, but find strange behavior: If a MyPage.properties as below: RequiredValidator = ${label} is required myForm.bookId = Book ID then validation message work well and is Book ID is

Re: [Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-11-06 Thread Juergen Donnerstag
It shouldn't. I guess the important point is that ComponentStringResourceLoade does not get the FormComponent (text1) You don't start looking for text1 in the formComponents properties file, do you? You start with the parent component containing text1. A key text1 expresses that text1 is a child

Re: [Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-11-05 Thread Sven Meier
Hello Juergen, I've taken a short look on your code in the CVS : DefaultValidatorResourceKeyFactory.java: * public* String newKey(IValidator validator, FormComponent formComponent) { *return* formComponent.getId() + *.* + Classes.name(validator.getClass()); }

Re: [Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-10-29 Thread Sven Meier
I've opened a bug, see: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=1339904group_id=119783atid=684975 Sven Juergen Donnerstag wrote: Did you open a bug or RFE already? If not, please do so, otherwise there is always a risk that it'll be forgotten. Juergen On 10/27/05, Martijn

Re: Re: [Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-10-28 Thread Juergen Donnerstag
Did you open a bug or RFE already? If not, please do so, otherwise there is always a risk that it'll be forgotten. Juergen On 10/27/05, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +1, if it doesn't break stuff. Martijn On 10/27/05, Juergen Donnerstag [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Would you

AW: Re: [Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-10-27 Thread sven
Looks to me you are right. We didn't think about a Panel being a child of a Form. I guess it was our assumption that FormComponents are always a direct child of a Form. Nested panels inside the same form was the first thing I checked when evaluating Wicket. It's a very handy solution to break

Re: Re: [Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-10-27 Thread Juergen Donnerstag
Would you please open a bug for it. Thanks. As long as long as no one else on the list is against fixing it that way, I'll try and put it into 1.1. Juergen On 10/27/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looks to me you are right. We didn't think about a Panel being a child of a Form.

Re: Re: [Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-10-27 Thread Martijn Dashorst
+1, if it doesn't break stuff. MartijnOn 10/27/05, Juergen Donnerstag [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Would you please open a bug for it. Thanks.As long as long as no one else on the list is against fixing it thatway, I'll try and put it into 1.1.JuergenOn 10/27/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-10-26 Thread sven
Hello, I'm struggling with the way Wicket loads String resources, particularly how DefaultComponentStringResourceLoader loads validation messages. Let's say that we have the following component hierarchy: APage -BForm id=b --XPanel id=x RequiredTextField id=foo --YPanel id=y

Re: [Wicket-user] Validation messages

2005-10-26 Thread Juergen Donnerstag
Looks to me you are right. We didn't think about a Panel being a child of a Form. I guess it was our assumption that FormComponents are always a direct child of a Form. I'm currently not able to look into the code. Do we traverse up the component tree already, like you do? Isn't there a risk that