Anthony, this is what I'm doing now. I am aware of that, the problem starts on the interpretation given to the request sent by the browser for checkboxes for these fields which I thought it should be if it is toggled means True, if not it means False. I do understand however that for most scenarios the current interpretation is more useful. The alternative would be to add a validator called "IS_CHECKED()" to include the distinction missing.
Thank you, Francisco On Thursday, 4 December 2014 12:30:01 UTC, Anthony wrote: > > Note, the problem is not with the validator -- if you pass it the value > False, it will successfully validate. The issue is that when a checkbox is > not checked, the browser sends nothing back for that form field (it does > not send back a value of False), so the value passed to the validator ends > up being None rather than False. > > In your case, just change your code slightly so the validator doesn't get > assigned in the case of boolean fields. Assuming you have the field type > stored somehow: > > if is_required and type != 'boolean': > > Or better yet, just set is_required to False for boolean fields. > > Anthony > > On Thursday, December 4, 2014 7:00:00 AM UTC-5, Francisco Ribeiro wrote: >> >> Kiran, >> I did not assign the default value of False explicitly but implicitly >> since it's already the default. >> >> Anthony, >> I understand the interpretation currently in place but if you think about >> this, validators are supposed to accept allowed values *first* and reject >> all others. True and False are the allowed values here and must have >> precedence to be accepted. Checkboxes are UIs for boolean types, so an >> unticked box means False, it does not mean NULL. >> >> On my scenario I have a dynamically generated form using >> SQLFORM.factory() where one my attributes for each form field is >> "is_required". So these things are stored on the DB, defining how the form >> should be generated and the way I was handling it was by adding the >> IS_NOT_EMPTY() validator to the form field if has the parameter is_required >> == True on its definition. It works fine for all other input fields tested >> where IS_NOT_EMPTY() makes sense but checkboxes broke it. >> >> Kind regards, >> Francisco >> >> On Thursday, 4 December 2014 11:48:04 UTC, Anthony wrote: >>> >>> If a boolean widget can only be true or false and never empty, then >>> there is no need for this validator to begin with, so just remove it. Are >>> you suggesting that the validator itself should be changed to always return >>> success for booleans? If so, what would be the point? >>> >>> Anthony >> >> -- Resources: - http://web2py.com - http://web2py.com/book (Documentation) - http://github.com/web2py/web2py (Source code) - https://code.google.com/p/web2py/issues/list (Report Issues) --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
