Ok, so should we update DynaValidatorForm and deprecate DynaValidatorActionForm?
-james --- Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's a little odd. Somebody wanted to key > on the action path rather than the > attribute, and so David accomodated by > providing the other class. > > A better way to go would be some type of > switch as we have for whether action input > is a path or a forward name. > > -Ted. > > 10/23/2002 11:17:09 AM, James Holmes > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Just curious why there are 2 classes? > Seems like the > >DynaValidatorActionForm could go away. > It simply > >overrides the validate() method in the > parent. Why > >do we need 2 implementations of validate > ()? > > > >-james > > > > > >_________________________________________ > _________ > >Do you Yahoo!? > >Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your > web site > >http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ > > > >-- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:struts- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:struts-dev- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org> > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
