[bv-dev] Support for constraints on container values (e.g. Collection<@Email String>)

[Otávio Gonçalves de Santana]

That's fine to me.

On 19 Sep 2016 4:31 a.m., "Gunnar Morling" <gunnar at hibernate.org> wrote:

> +1
>
> If everyone could take a look at this one, that'd be great! It's a bit
> more complex, so the more eyes we get on this one, the better.
>
> Thanks!
>
> 2016-09-19 13:28 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel at hibernate.org>:
>
>> This is probably going to be most visible feature of Bean Validation
>> 2.0. We particularly need your feedback and involvement on this one.
>>
>> Emmanuel
>>
>> On Tue 2016-09-06 18:12, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
>> >Hi all,
>> >
>> >I and a few others have been working on a proposal to support things
>> >like Collection<@Email String> and Optional<@Email String>. This is
>> >more complicated that it seems at first glance.
>> >
>> >Instead of doing an ad-hoc support for the various collection types,
>> >Optional and the JavaFX Properties, we quickly decided to define the
>> >notion of container and the ability to declare constraints on contained
>> >elements to validate them.
>> >
>> >This lead to two main proposals that you can read at
>> >http://beanvalidation.org/proposals/BVAL-508/
>> >
>> >This is a relatively long read, you can start by ignoring "alternative"
>> >options for your first pass. We are very interested in feedback at this
>> >stage as we have been pushing these proposal very far already and they
>> >would need to become part of the spec as next step.
>> >
>> >Let me know of what you think, questions, remarks etc.
>> >
>> >In particular, I'm interested in what you think of the following.
>> >
>> >The capability to define custom containers.
>> >
>> >The extractor approach vs its alternative.
>> >
>> >The concepts of @ConstraintsAppliesTo(COMTAINED) used for JavaFX and for
>> >subclasses of containers.
>> >
>> >@Valid, in particular the legacy and new forms and how to handle the
>> >transition.
>> >
>> >And finally, but a big one, what do you think of proposal 1 vs proposal
>> >2. The latter being more generic but with more open questions (and a
>> >less elaborated at this stage).
>> >
>> >Emmanuel
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >beanvalidation-dev mailing list
>> >beanvalidation-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> >https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
>> beanvalidation-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> beanvalidation-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/beanvalidation-dev/attachments/20160919/3d1e61da/attachment.html