Peter:
Thanks for your input but I can't wait until the user has reached
the form's last page because depending on her selections i have to send her
to a different JSP. Any other idea about this?
Thanks again,
Gastón.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Halverson, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 01 November, 2000 5:51 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: Multi page form desing
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ansaldo, Gaston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 3:29 PM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: Multi page form desing
> >
> >
> > Hi all!!!
> >
> > I'm trying to implement a *wizard style form* using 4 or 5
> > jsp's. I read in
> > the user doc's that in Struts one should try to design the
> > pages using the
> > same XXXXForm and XXXXAction class for all the pages inside
> > the *conceptual
> > form*
> >
> > I'm wondering how I'm suppose to design the XXXXForm and
> > XXXXAction classes
> > in order to validate the form data just one time and not as
> > many times as
> > jsp's invoke the same XXXForm class..
> >
> > Can anybody share some ideas about how to implement this kind of
> > functionality?
>
>
> You'd need to track whether the form is all the way done or
> in progress,
> depending on which screen of the wizard the user has
> completed. Either
> explicitly, as a form property that gets set by the Action,
> or implicitly,
> perhaps using a custom ActionMapping property (the latter
> makes it easier to
> introduce new pages, IMO, since you can define it as part of your
> struts-config.xml). As long as there still screens to do, the form's
> validate() method would always return true. Only when the
> user has finished
> all the screens do you actually check the form content as
> appropriate.
>
> Ditto for the action, assuming you're using a single Action
> for the entire
> sequence.
>
> The only problem with deferring validation until the wizard
> is complete is
> that it's harder to return the user to the particular page
> associated with
> the bad input.
>
> pete
>
