hi @ all, currently every framework which needs to integrate (bv based) method-validation has to implement the rules specified for @ValidateOnExecution itself. there is no method in the api for delegating the evaluation to the bv-implementation (and everything passed to ExecutableValidator gets validated independent of the xml based or annotation based config). it isn't just a higher effort for such frameworks, it (already) leads to inconsistencies across frameworks. -> imo it should be one of the first topics for bv.next. regards, gerhard _______________________________________________ beanvalidation-dev mailing list beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev

Hi, To give some background: the idea was to let integration frameworks decide which executables should be validated to allow for consistency with their own rules for interceptor enablement and request processing; e.g. JAX-RS validates getter-style resource methods by default, or a DI framework might have its own annotation for controlling validation or descriptor format for registering interceptors. Based on that, @ValidateOnExecution (and the settings in XML) is provided as the *recommended* way of controlling executable validation but its not obligatory: "This section expresses the behavior that integration with interception frameworks should follow. Any deviation should be considered with care as it will surprise Bean Validation users." That being said, I agree that adding a facility for retrieving these settings via the BV API makes sense to make life easier for those integrators wishing to adhere to the BV behavior; integrators with deriving behavior could still use this API as input for their evaluation. --Gunnar 2013/7/26 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; > I will let Hardy and Gunnar answer that one, this has been discussed a > lot and some arguments they provided lead to delegate the rules > implementations to the integration framework. > > On 25 juil. 2013, at 22:55, Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek(a)gmail.com&gt; > wrote: > > > hi @ all, > > > > currently every framework which needs to integrate (bv based) > method-validation has to implement the rules specified for > @ValidateOnExecution itself. > > there is no method in the api for delegating the evaluation to the > bv-implementation (and everything passed to ExecutableValidator gets > validated > > independent of the xml based or annotation based config). > > > > it isn't just a higher effort for such frameworks, it (already) leads > to inconsistencies across frameworks. > > -> imo it should be one of the first topics for bv.next. > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > _______________________________________________ > > beanvalidation-dev mailing list > > beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev > > _______________________________________________ > beanvalidation-dev mailing list > beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev > _______________________________________________ beanvalidation-dev mailing list beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev