Arron,

I agree with the analysis.  There are of course other tools that do similar things
(including the Digester) but I've seen no others that do all three (XML/Schema/SQL)
at  least opensource.  It seems like a natural way to proceed in order to automate
some of this stuff.  When I noticed that you could get Castor to generate beans with
the validate method I thought the author probably had Struts in mind..  If I get a
chance, I'll look into it further.

Thanks,
Jon

Arron Bates wrote:

> Jon,
>
> I'm quite certain the parser has the ability, it just doesn't do it.
> It's the generation of the Java code which is stopping it. I would think
> you could hack it, so when an object's setter is called automatically
> call it's validate() method (which the system creates both, so all you'd
> have to hack is when and where) for each object continuing to set all
> data (it carries invalid data quite happily, only complains when you ask
> it to marshal the document out or validate it) and remember all the
> validation errors which were thrown and just pop them into the pile for
> Struts. Could be groovy... but it's not an out-of-the-box ability.
>
> I've only had the chance to use the schema side of the matter. We use it
> to create the XML documents against the schema, when we have to do
> something which requires XML. I don't think my current client is a
> particular fan of XML per-se.
>
> Arron.
>
> Jon Ferguson wrote:
>
> >Arron,
> >
> >Thanks for the hands-on.  Shame really.. surely the parser provides this data..
> >wonder if there's another way to 'compile' that information into a method.
> >
> >BTW, have you used Castor's Object-Relational mapping?  The second half of the
> >equation would be to use that to persist the populated beans from within the
> >Action.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Jon
> >
> >Arron Bates wrote:
> >
> >>I've tried to do this with Castor generated objects. Problem is though,
> >>is that the errors are not fine grained at all.
> >>You validate the document by calling the validate() method on the top
> >>node, and you get a yes or a no.
> >>You can do this for all of the sub objects, but it's just that, you
> >>still have to implement the field validation yourself.
> >>
> >>Naturally you can't play any tricks with the calling of property methods
> >>to work around various issues as your objects are locked down to the
> >>automation process.
> >>
> >>Otherwise it's quite excellent.
> >>
> >>Arron.
> >>
> >>Jon Ferguson wrote:
> >>
> >>>( Republished under appropriate Subject :-( ).
> >>>
> >>>Hey,
> >>>
> >>>I've been toying with the idea of Modelling my form beans using XML Schema,
> >>>then generating the actual beans using some XML binding tool like Castor (which
> >>>should also generate my validate function).  I should also be able to use
> >>>Castor to do RDBMS mapping as well.. (but from a session bean manipulating the
> >>>formbeans for example).
> >>>
> >>>I'm thinking of utilising schema from developments such as RosettaNet, BizTalk
> >>>Frameworks and ebXML - noting that often the info entered into forms could be
> >>>the same message information that might be passed between businesses. (Eg. a
> >>>Purchase Order, etc.).
> >>>
> >>>I'm hoping that the result would: a) help to standardize the business app. b)
> >>>leave it wide open for making use of b-2-b developments such as webServices and
> >>>the above efforts. c) provide automatic form validation (inherent in the
> >>>Schema), d) obviate the  hand-coading of formbeans.
> >>>
> >>>Any comments on this approach?  Has anyone tried this?
> >>>
> >>>Cheers,
> >>>
> >>>Jon
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>--
> >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>
> >>--
> >>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >--
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Part 1.2
> >
> > Content-Type:
> >
> > text/plain
> >
> >
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to