Annotation Validation, per method? 2007-11-06 - By Ted Husted
Back
There's a setting that you can change, but when you do, you lose
inherited property validations.
* https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2191
So, it's still not an optimal situation. :(
Ideally, we should be able to have per-method validations and inherit
methods placed on properties.
Of course, if you use one-action-method per Action-class, then all the
annotations work just fine.
-Ted.
On Nov 6, 2007 6:51 AM, Martin Gilday <martin.lists@(protected)> wrote:
> Thanks. Is this not a severe limitation of the annotation version if it
> is more limited than the xml version?
>
>
>
> -- -- Original message -- --
> From: "F?tima Silveira" <fawixfa@(protected)>
> To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <user@(protected)>
> Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 17:58:32 +0100
> Subject: Re: Annotation Validation, per method?
>
> i dont know to use anotation but with xml is
> ClassName-actionAlias_method-
> validation.xml
>
> On 11/5/07, Martin Gilday <martin.lists@(protected)> wrote:
> >
> > Can you have annotation validation per method? I have put @(protected)
> > on both my display and update methods (display shows the record from
> > input), but all of the validation seems to be run at once. Can you
> > achieve this with xml or annotation validation, or am I back to
> > validateInput methods?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Martin.
> >
> > -- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@(protected)
> > For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@(protected)
> >
> >
>
> -- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@(protected)
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@(protected)
>
>
--
HTH, Ted <http://www.husted.com/ted/blog/>
-- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@(protected)
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@(protected)
|
|
