Re: [seam-dev] Extended validation constraints

There is an issue though: Whitelists are created through the use of Whiltelist class itself. It´s hard to extend this class (and meaningless). The best would be to specify a WhilelistFactory class . What do u think ? Regards, George 2011/6/13 Gunnar Morling&lt;gunnar.morling(a)googlemail.com&gt;: > +1 for renaming the constraint to @SafeHtml. > > Apart from that the pull request looks good to me and IMO we can > include it in 4.2. The change doesn't modify anything of the HV > internals, so there is no big risk about it. > > -- Gunnar > > 2011/6/13 Kevin Pollet&lt;pollet.kevin(a)gmail.com&gt;: >> Hi all, >> Answers inline. >> >> Le dimanche 12 juin 2011 à 20:22, Hardy Ferentschik a écrit : >> >> Hi all, >> >> nice to see some new constraints :-) >> Some more thoughts inline >> >> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 12:31:14 +0200, Gunnar Morling >> <gunnar.morling(a)googlemail.com&gt; wrote: >> >> I'm not totally sure what the right place for it would be, though. The >> constraints we have in HV so far are independent from any application >> layer. @WebSafe would be the first one specific to the web layer. >> >> IMO this is validator is not really application layer dependent, even >> thought this is >> obviously where it will be most useful. Personally I would find something >> like SafeHtml >> better than @WebSafe. It would also tie the constraints less to a layer. >> IMO it also communicates >> its purpose better. >> >> +1 >> I think that renaming the annotation will better communicates its purpose. >> WebSafe is general, SafeHtml sounds good to me. >> >> >> Maybe it would also be a good idea to have a separate library >> exclusively for custom constraints which could be used from everywhere >> ("HV Commons" or similar). >> >> I think it is to early think about a new module/library. As said, I don't >> see this constraints >> necessarily tied to a layer and without at least a couple of concrete >> layer specific constraints I >> think we should wait. >> I'm not sure to understand. >> Why a new module could be created? >> >> >> We already have a CR for 4.2. If we decide to add @WebSafe to HV do >> you think we should add this in 4.2 or to the next release? >> >> My initial feeling is to wait for the next release, but I don't feel to >> strongly about this. >> However, -1 for a new library/module and +1 for a rename of the constraint. >> >> --Hardy >> >> Like Hardy my initial feeling is to wait for the next release but the pull >> request is >> opened and it will not be very hard to integrate it in master :-) I've >> no strong >> opinion about this. >> >> --Kevin