Sharing a Validator

[Nathan Sokalski]

I have a form that contains a number of fields, all of which have
validators. There are two submit buttons, one to update a record and one to
add a record. Because the only difference in validation is to make sure
someone is not using a username that is already in use, I would like to be
able to use all the other validators for both the add and update buttons.
However, because as far as I know a validator can only be in one
validationgroup , that does not help me (although if they haven't already, I
think it would be a great improvement for the next version of the .NET
framework). Does anybody have any suggestions on a good way to solve my
problem (having 2 copies of each validator would work and be very simple,
but I would hope for a more efficient way)? Thanks.
--
Nathan Sokalski
njsokalski@hotm ail.com

http://www.nathansokalski.com/

[ace_away]

Re: Sharing a Validator

Why not use only one button? Change the text of the button from "Add" to
"Update" depending on the data that is populating your form.

Use a hidden textbox to keep the ID of the item. So if the textbox has a ID

>0 then it's an update, else it's an Add.

It's a little more complex than that, but it might get you started.



"Nathan Sokalski" <njsokalski@hot mail.comwrote in message
news:eQCewiZHIH A.3940@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...

>I have a form that contains a number of fields, all of which have
>validators. There are two submit buttons, one to update a record and one to
>add a record. Because the only difference in validation is to make sure
>someone is not using a username that is already in use, I would like to be
>able to use all the other validators for both the add and update buttons.
>However, because as far as I know a validator can only be in one
>validationgrou p, that does not help me (although if they haven't already, I
>think it would be a great improvement for the next version of the .NET
>framework). Does anybody have any suggestions on a good way to solve my
>problem (having 2 copies of each validator would work and be very simple,
>but I would hope for a more efficient way)? Thanks.
--
Nathan Sokalski
njsokalski@hotm ail.com

http://www.nathansokalski.com/

>

[Nathan Sokalski]

Re: Sharing a Validator

I would do that, but unfortunately the client wants to always see both the
Add and Update buttons. If I were designing what the page should look like,
I would probably do something similar to your suggestion. But unfortunately,
an unhappy client means an unhappy boss which means an unhappy paycheck. I
guess that's all part of the business, with people caring so much about the
look of the page.
--
Nathan Sokalski
njsokalski@hotm ail.com

http://www.nathansokalski.com/

"ace_away" <ace@away.comwr ote in message
news:uSWs3h%23H IHA.5764@TK2MSF TNGP06.phx.gbl. ..

Why not use only one button? Change the text of the button from "Add" to
"Update" depending on the data that is populating your form.
>
Use a hidden textbox to keep the ID of the item. So if the textbox has a
ID

0 then it's an update, else it's an Add.

>
It's a little more complex than that, but it might get you started.
>
>
>
"Nathan Sokalski" <njsokalski@hot mail.comwrote in message
news:eQCewiZHIH A.3940@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...

>>I have a form that contains a number of fields, all of which have
>>validators. There are two submit buttons, one to update a record and one
>>to add a record. Because the only difference in validation is to make sure
>>someone is not using a username that is already in use, I would like to be
>>able to use all the other validators for both the add and update buttons.
>>However, because as far as I know a validator can only be in one
>>validationgro up, that does not help me (although if they haven't already,
>>I think it would be a great improvement for the next version of the .NET
>>framework). Does anybody have any suggestions on a good way to solve my
>>problem (having 2 copies of each validator would work and be very simple,
>>but I would hope for a more efficient way)? Thanks.
>--
>Nathan Sokalski
>njsokalski@hotm ail.com
>http://www.nathansokalski.com/
>>

>
>

[Mark Rae [MVP]]

Re: Sharing a Validator

"Nathan Sokalski" <njsokalski@hot mail.comwrote in message
news:eQCewiZHIH A.3940@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...

[cross-posting removed]

a validator can only be in one validationgroup

This is one of the reasons that I never go anywhere near the validation
controls...

They're fine for basic stuff, but simply aren't flexible enough for more
complex validation.

For this, I'd just have one JavaScript function which accepts a parameter to
indicate whether the record is to be inserted or updated...

<script type="text/javascript">
function validateForm(ps trMode)
{
// common validation
if (pstrMode == 'New')
{
// extra validation for inserts
}
}
</script>

<asp:Button ID="cmdAdd" runat="server" Text="Add" OnCommand="Save _Command"
CommandArgument ="Add" OnClientClick=" return validateForm('N ew');" />
<asp:Button ID="cmdEdit" runat="server" Text="Edit" OnCommand="Save _Command"
CommandArgument ="Edit" OnClientClick=" return validateForm('E dit');" />


--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP

http://www.markrae.net

[Dave Bush]

Re: Sharing a Validator

The custom validation control works fine for the oddball cases. NOT
using the validation controls because they don't always fill the need is
very short sited.

Since I don't know exactly what you are coding, I won't go so far as to
say that I could do anything you are doing the hard way (imo) with a
custom validation control. But, I'm pretty darn sure I could. Which
would save me time in the long run because I could use the regular
validation controls for the things that are common.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Rae [MVP] [mailto:mark@mar kNOSPAMrae.net]
Posted At: Monday, November 05, 2007 5:51 PM
Posted To: microsoft.publi c.dotnet.framew ork.aspnet
Conversation: Sharing a Validator
Subject: Re: Sharing a Validator

"Nathan Sokalski" <njsokalski@hot mail.comwrote in message
news:eQCewiZHIH A.3940@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...

[cross-posting removed]

a validator can only be in one validationgroup

This is one of the reasons that I never go anywhere near the validation
controls...

They're fine for basic stuff, but simply aren't flexible enough for more

complex validation.

For this, I'd just have one JavaScript function which accepts a
parameter to
indicate whether the record is to be inserted or updated...

<script type="text/javascript">
function validateForm(ps trMode)
{
// common validation
if (pstrMode == 'New')
{
// extra validation for inserts
}
}
</script>

<asp:Button ID="cmdAdd" runat="server" Text="Add"
OnCommand="Save _Command"
CommandArgument ="Add" OnClientClick=" return validateForm('N ew');" />
<asp:Button ID="cmdEdit" runat="server" Text="Edit"
OnCommand="Save _Command"
CommandArgument ="Edit" OnClientClick=" return validateForm('E dit');" />


--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP

http://www.markrae.net

[Mark Rae [MVP]]

Re: Sharing a Validator

"Dave Bush" <davembush@dmbc llc.comwrote in message
news:0E91F9BC1F 98473596BB46B4A BC73EAC@OfficeV ista...

The custom validation control works fine for the oddball cases. NOT
using the validation controls because they don't always fill the need is
very short sited.

Not short sited (or even short-sighted) at all - there are many scenarios
which simply don't fit into the standard set of validation controls:

http://www.peterblum.com/VAM/ValMain.aspx

No doubt you could write your own JavaScript to fit into the Custom
Validator, but why bother when you can just write the precise JavaScript you
need...?


--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP

http://www.markrae.net

[Nathan Sokalski]

Re: Sharing a Validator

That would be great for situations in which you did not care about
client-side validation, but I do want client-side validation (sort of). The
validators that differ between the Add and Edit is how you make sure a
duplicate username is not being created (when adding, it cannot exist
period, but with editing it can exist, but only as the current username of
the record being edited). I have written Validators (true validators that
inherits from the BaseValidator class) that use AJAX to check this
information on the server, because I do not want my users to have to
postback when filling out any of the form fields.
--
Nathan Sokalski
njsokalski@hotm ail.com

http://www.nathansokalski.com/

"Mark Rae [MVP]" <mark@markNOSPA Mrae.netwrote in message
news:e9Hvo5$HIH A.2064@TK2MSFTN GP06.phx.gbl...

"Nathan Sokalski" <njsokalski@hot mail.comwrote in message
news:eQCewiZHIH A.3940@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...
>
[cross-posting removed]
>

>a validator can only be in one validationgroup

>
This is one of the reasons that I never go anywhere near the validation
controls...
>
They're fine for basic stuff, but simply aren't flexible enough for more
complex validation.
>
For this, I'd just have one JavaScript function which accepts a parameter
to indicate whether the record is to be inserted or updated...
>
<script type="text/javascript">
function validateForm(ps trMode)
{
// common validation
if (pstrMode == 'New')
{
// extra validation for inserts
}
}
</script>
>
<asp:Button ID="cmdAdd" runat="server" Text="Add" OnCommand="Save _Command"
CommandArgument ="Add" OnClientClick=" return validateForm('N ew');" />
<asp:Button ID="cmdEdit" runat="server" Text="Edit"
OnCommand="Save _Command" CommandArgument ="Edit" OnClientClick=" return
validateForm('E dit');" />
>
>
--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP
http://www.markrae.net

[Mark Rae [MVP]]

Re: Sharing a Validator

"Nathan Sokalski" <njsokalski@hot mail.comwrote in message
news:Op%23f7NBI IHA.1316@TK2MSF TNGP02.phx.gbl. ..

That would be great for situations in which you did not care about
client-side validation, but I do want client-side validation (sort of).
The validators that differ between the Add and Edit is how you make sure a
duplicate username is not being created (when adding, it cannot exist
period, but with editing it can exist, but only as the current username of
the record being edited). I have written Validators (true validators that
inherits from the BaseValidator class) that use AJAX to check this
information on the server, because I do not want my users to have to
postback when filling out any of the form fields.

Correct - that's how I do it too...

So what's the problem...?


--
Mark Rae
ASP.NET MVP

http://www.markrae.net

[PJ on Development]

Re: Sharing a Validator

Hi, Nathan

The validators work regardless the button pressed, however, you can
define the ValidationGroup for the button and that button would
validate only with the specified validation group (or validators that
does not have the ValidationGroup specified)... well, at least
according to the docs -- I didn't make any test with it so far.

Regards,

Paulo Santos

http://pjondevelopment.50webs.com

On Nov 2, 6:38 pm, "Nathan Sokalski" <njsokal...@hot mail.comwrote:

I have a form that contains a number of fields, all of which have
validators. There are two submit buttons, one to update a record and one to
add a record. Because the only difference in validation is to make sure
someone is not using a username that is already in use, I would like to be
able to use all the other validators for both the add and update buttons.
However, because as far as I know a validator can only be in one
validationgroup , that does not help me (although if they haven't already, I
think it would be a great improvement for the next version of the .NET
framework). Does anybody have any suggestions on a good way to solve my
problem (having 2 copies of each validator would work and be very simple,
but I would hope for a more efficient way)? Thanks.
--
Nathan Sokalski
njsokal...@hotm ail.comhttp://www.nathansokal ski.com/