Would it worth the while to post an enhancement request?
El lun 05 may 2014 10:17:09 CEST, Lukasz Lenart escribió:
It isn't supported and I don't see simple way to achieve this. 2014-05-03 23:33 GMT+02:00 Antonio Sánchez <[email protected]>:Hello. in a middle sized application there may be hundreds of required fields, and maybe dozens of some other validator type, which are all very verbose to define. For instance: guess a big form with many required fields: <validator type="requiredstring"> <param name="fieldname">person.firstName</param> <message>First name is required.</message> </validator> <validator type="requiredstring"> <param name="fieldname">person.lastName</param> <message>Last name is required.</message> </validator> ... same for age... ... same for manymor... This is repeating the same pattern for both defining the validator and the corresponding message. Is it possible to abbreviate to something like (pseudo-language): <validator type="requiredstring"> <param name="fieldname">person.lastName, person.lastName, person.age, person.manymore</param> <message>[MATCHED_FIELDNAME] is required.</message> </validator> or <validator type="requiredstring"> <param name="fieldname">person.lastName, person.lastName, person.age, person.manymore</param> <message key="requiredField" /> </validator> and 'global.properties' having requiredField = [MATCHED_FIELDNAME] is required. Thank you. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
