At http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16337 it mentions that this will not be fixed until Struts 1.2
-----Original Message----- From: Vinh Tran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 11:45 AM To: Struts Users Mailing List Subject: RE: Mutlipage Forms Again (DynaValidatorForm) I am trying out the page attribute for validation assuming the known bug has been fixed. No one has confirmed either way and I couldn't tell from the release notes or bugzilla. Probably just me being doing a poor search but I could not find it. Anyway, I'm pretty sure with the page attribute this should be relatively simple. If not, I may have to try your approach. Vinh -----Original Message----- From: Rick Reumann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 11:23 AM To: Struts Users Mailing List Subject: Re: Mutlipage Forms Again (DynaValidatorForm) On Fri, 14 Mar 2003 11:02:57 -0500 "Vinh Tran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have scoured the archives and still have not made any progress on > using DynaValidatorForm for multi page forms (wizards). I did find a > bug about the page attribute not being set with DynaValidatorForm. > Has this been resolved with 1.1-b3? If so, can anyone provide some > techniques/best practices on implementing multipage forms using > DynaValidatorForm? I'm sorry I didn't catch the beginning of this thread so if this has been mentioned or won't work for you situation forgive me- What if you had one master bean of all the information you attempt to collect. I'd probably just stick that in session scope. Then you use separate DynaValidatorForms to collect the appropriate information on each of the pages. Then in each of your actions I'd populate the main bean in the session with the appropriate information. This might be an ugly way to make sure they follow the proper flow, but I would just set a variable called "stepVal" or "pageval" in the main bean in the session and give it a number. Then in each action (step through your wizard) you make sure that the "stepVal" is less than this action's value. That way they can't move forward without having completed early steps. Would that work? Seems relatively clean to me. -- Rick Reumann --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *************************************************************************** This electronic mail transmission contains confidential and/or privileged information intended only for the person(s) named. Any use, distribution, copying or disclosure by another person is strictly prohibited. *************************************************************************** --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
