For your info, the change is quite minimal https://github.com/emmanuelbernard/beanvalidation-spec/commit/f85703a2a39... On 30 mai 2012, at 20:11, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: > It seems there is some kind of consensus that considering the runtime type instead of the satin type to build the property path is better. > Check out https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-226 and let me know if you object. > > Otherwise, I plan to clarify this in the spec. > > Emmanuel > _______________________________________________ > 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

+1 for using the runtime type. --Gunnar 2012/5/30 Sebastian Thomschke <sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de&gt;: >  I am +1 for runtime type consideration. > > Seb > > On 30.05.2012 20:50, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: >> For your info, the change is quite minimal >> https://github.com/emmanuelbernard/beanvalidation-spec/commit/f85703a2a39... >> >> On 30 mai 2012, at 20:11, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: >> >>> It seems there is some kind of consensus that considering the runtime type instead of the satin type to build the property path is better. >>> Check out https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-226 and let me know if you object. >>> >>> Otherwise, I plan to clarify this in the spec. >>> >>> Emmanuel >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 _______________________________________________ beanvalidation-dev mailing list beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev

+1 as well, especially since Hibernate Validator also implements this approach since HV-468 ;-) On May 30, 2012, at 8:50 PM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: > For your info, the change is quite minimal > https://github.com/emmanuelbernard/beanvalidation-spec/commit/f85703a2a39... > > On 30 mai 2012, at 20:11, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: > >> It seems there is some kind of consensus that considering the runtime type instead of the satin type to build the property path is better. >> Check out https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-226 and let me know if you object. >> >> Otherwise, I plan to clarify this in the spec. >> >> Emmanuel >> _______________________________________________ >> 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