Search Results

Search found 16426 results on 658 pages for 'model validation'.

Page 12/658 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • Enterprise Library Validation Block - Should validation be placed on class or interface?

    - by Robert MacLean
    I am not sure where the best place to put validation (using the Enterprise Library Validation Block) is? Should it be on the class or on the interface? Things that may effect it Validation rules would not be changed in classes which inherit from the interface. Validation rules would not be changed in classes which inherit from the class. Inheritance will occur from the class in most cases - I suspect some fringe cases to inherit from the interface (but I would try and avoid it). The interface main use is for DI which will be done with the Unity block.

    Read the article

  • DataAnnotations jQuery validation in asp.net mvc 2

    - by Anonimous
    Hi, I trying to use jQuery validation plugin with DataAnnotations in asp.net mvc 2 final. Now I'm using MicrosoftMvcValidation.js and it works. But I can't find way to work with jQuery validation. I read about MicrosoftMvcJQueryValidation.js. But I think that it is obsolete. How can I use DataAnnotations with jQuery validation plugin?

    Read the article

  • Doing a lot of input validation in VB.NET

    - by Andy
    I have a form set up where users can enter their booking for a room at my college. I want to validate the user input to avoid SQL injection (my program uses a MS Access database) and also stop numbers and synbols in their name, etc. I can do the validation fine, but there is to be a lot of validation and then methods executed only if all validation tests come back as true. I did have something like this: If txtName.Text = "" Then frmBookErr.SetError(txtName, "Name field cannot be left blank.") fail = 1 Else frmBookErr.SetError(txtName, "") fail = 0 End If And then check the fail variable, but it obviously gets overridden later in the form if one of the validation tests come back as true. Can anyone provide some input into this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • JQuery pass model to controller

    - by slandau
    I want to pass the mvc page model back to my controller within a Javascript Object. How would I do that? var urlString = "<%= System.Web.VirtualPathUtility.ToAbsolute("~/mvc/Indications.cfc/ExportToExcel")%>"; var jsonNickname = { model: Model, viewName: "<%= VirtualPathUtility.ToAbsolute("~/Views/Indications/TermSheetViews/Swap/CashFlows.aspx")%>", fileName: 'Cashflows.xls' } $.ajax({ type: "POST", url: urlString, data: jsonNickname, async: false, success: function (data) { $('#termSheetPrinted').append(data); } }); So where it says model: Model, I want the Model to be the actual page model that I declare at the top of the page: Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage<Chatham.Web.Models.Indications.SwapModel>" How can I do that?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 2 Client Side Validation doesn't work as advertised in VS2010

    - by Daniel Crenna
    In VS2010 and ASP.NET MVC 2, it seems that client-side validation (JQuery Futures or the stock option) doesn't quite work as advertised. I'm noticing that "tabbing off" a validated element will not invoke the client-side validation as promised. For a required field, you have to tab into the element, enter something, then remove it completely, in order to trigger the required validation. That's not really what I'm after here, and I'm hoping it's just a configuration issue on my side. How do I get the validation effects from previous versions so that a previous value isn't necessary (without having to modify the client-side scripts if possible)?

    Read the article

  • How should I architect my Model and Data Access layer objects in my website?

    - by Robin Winslow
    I've been tasked with designing Data layer for a website at work, and I am very interested in architecture of code for the best flexibility, maintainability and readability. I am generally acutely aware of the value in completely separating out my actual Models from the Data Access layer, so that the Models are completely naive when it comes to Data Access. And in this case it's particularly useful to do this as the Models may be built from the Database or may be built from a Soap web service. So it seems to me to make sense to have Factories in my data access layer which create Model objects. So here's what I have so far (in my made-up pseudocode): class DataAccess.ProductsFromXml extends DataAccess.ProductFactory {} class DataAccess.ProductsFromDatabase extends DataAccess.ProductFactory {} These then get used in the controller in a fashion similar to the following: var xmlProductCreator = DataAccess.ProductsFromXml(xmlDataProvider); var databaseProductCreator = DataAccess.ProductsFromXml(xmlDataProvider); // Returns array of Product model objects var XmlProducts = databaseProductCreator.Products(); // Returns array of Product model objects var DbProducts = xmlProductCreator.Products(); So my question is, is this a good structure for my Data Access layer? Is it a good idea to use a Factory for building my Model objects from the data? Do you think I've misunderstood something? And are there any general patterns I should read up on for how to write my data access objects to create my Model objects?

    Read the article

  • How do you formulate the Domain Model in Domain Driven Design properly (Bounded Contexts, Domains)?

    - by lko
    Say you have a few applications which deal with a few different Core Domains. The examples are made up and it's hard to put a real example with meaningful data together (concisely). In Domain Driven Design (DDD) when you start looking at Bounded Contexts and Domains/Sub Domains, it says that a Bounded Context is a "phase" in a lifecycle. An example of Context here would be within an ecommerce system. Although you could model this as a single system, it would also warrant splitting into separate Contexts. Each of these areas within the application have their own Ubiquitous Language, their own Model, and a way to talk to other Bounded Contexts to obtain the information they need. The Core, Sub, and Generic Domains are the area of expertise and can be numerous in complex applications. Say there is a long process dealing with an Entity for example a Book in a core domain. Now looking at the Bounded Contexts there can be a number of phases in the books life-cycle. Say outline, creation, correction, publish, sale phases. Now imagine a second core domain, perhaps a store domain. The publisher has its own branch of stores to sell books. The store can have a number of Bounded Contexts (life-cycle phases) for example a "Stock" or "Inventory" context. In the first domain there is probably a Book database table with basically just an ID to track the different book Entities in the different life-cycles. Now suppose you have 10+ supporting domains e.g. Users, Catalogs, Inventory, .. (hard to think of relevant examples). For example a DomainModel for the Book Outline phase, the Creation phase, Correction phase, Publish phase, Sale phase. Then for the Store core domain it probably has a number of life-cycle phases. public class BookId : Entity { public long Id { get; set; } } In the creation phase (Bounded Context) the book could be a simple class. public class Book : BookId { public string Title { get; set; } public List<string> Chapters { get; set; } //... } Whereas in the publish phase (Bounded Context) it would have all the text, release date etc. public class Book : BookId { public DateTime ReleaseDate { get; set; } //... } The immediate benefit I can see in separating by "life-cycle phase" is that it's a great way to separate business logic so there aren't mammoth all-encompassing Entities nor Domain Services. A problem I have is figuring out how to concretely define the rules to the physical layout of the Domain Model. A. Does the Domain Model get "modeled" so there are as many bounded contexts (separate projects etc.) as there are life-cycle phases across the core domains in a complex application? Edit: Answer to A. Yes, according to the answer by Alexey Zimarev there should be an entire "Domain" for each bounded context. B. Is the Domain Model typically arranged by Bounded Contexts (or Domains, or both)? Edit: Answer to B. Each Bounded Context should have its own complete "Domain" (Service/Entities/VO's/Repositories) C. Does it mean there can easily be 10's of "segregated" Domain Models and multiple projects can use it (the Entities/Value Objects)? Edit: Answer to C. There is a complete "Domain" for each Bounded Context and the Domain Model (Entity/VO layer/project) isn't "used" by the other Bounded Contexts directly, only via chosen paths (i.e. via Domain Events). The part that I am trying to figure out is how the Domain Model is actually implemented once you start to figure out your Bounded Contexts and Core/Sub Domains, particularly in complex applications. The goal is to establish the definitions which can help to separate Entities between the Bounded Contexts and Domains.

    Read the article

  • What is a good strategy for binding view objects to model objects in C++?

    - by B.J.
    Imagine I have a rich data model that is represented by a hierarchy of objects. I also have a view hierarchy with views that can extract required data from model objects and display the data (and allow the user to manipulate the data). Actually, there could be multiple view hierarchies that can represent and manipulate the model (e.g. an overview-detail view and a direct manipulation view). My current approach for this is for the controller layer to store a reference to the underlying model object in the View object. The view object can then get the current data from the model for display, and can send the model object messages to update the data. View objects are effectively observers of the model objects and the model objects broadcast notifications when properties change. This approach allows all the views to update simultaneously when any view changes the model. Implemented carefully, this all works. However, it does require a lot of work to ensure that no view or model objects hold any stale references to model objects. The user can delete model objects or sub-hierarchies of the model at any time. Ensuring that all the view objects that hold references to the model objects that have been deleted is time-consuming and difficult. It feels like the approach I have been taking is not especially clean; while I don't want to have to have explicit code in the controller layer for mediating the communication between the views and the model, it seems like there must be a better (implicit) approach for establishing bindings between the view and the model and between related model objects. In particular, I am looking for an approach (in C++) that understands two key points: There is a many to one relationship between view and model objects If the underlying model object is destroyed, all the dependent view objects must be cleaned up so that no stale references exist While shared_ptr and weak_ptr can be used to manage the lifetimes of the underlying model objects and allows for weak references from the view to the model, they don't provide for notification of the destruction of the underlying object (they do in the sense that the use of a stale weak_ptr allows for notification), but I need an approach that notifies the dependent objects that their weak reference is going away. Can anyone suggest a good strategy to manage this?

    Read the article

  • Data Validation of a Comma Delimited List

    - by Brad
    I need a simple way of taking a comma seperated list in a cell, and providing a drop down box to select one of them. For Example, the cell could contain: 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64 And in a further cell, using Data Validation, I want to provide a drop-down list to select ONE of those values I need to do this without VBA or Macros please. Apolgies, I want this to work with Excel 2010 and later. I have been playing around with counting the number of commas in the list and then trying to split this into a number of rows of single numbers etc with no joy yet.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET. MVC2. Entity Framework. Cannot pass primary key value back from view to [HttpPost]

    - by Paul Connolly
    I pass a ViewModel (which contains a "Person" object) from the "EditPerson" controller action into the view. When posted back from the view, the ActionResult receives all of the Person properties except the ID (which it says is zero instead of say its real integer) Can anyone tell me why? The controllers look like this: public ActionResult EditPerson(int personID) { var personToEdit = repository.GetPerson(personID); FormationViewModel vm = new FormationViewModel(); vm.Person = personToEdit; return View(vm); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult EditPerson(FormationViewModel model) <<Passes in all properties except ID { // Persistence code } The View looks like this: <%@ Page Title="" Language="C#" MasterPageFile="~/Views/Shared/Site.Master" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage<Afp.Models.Formation.FormationViewModel>" %> <% using (Html.BeginForm()) {% <%= Html.ValidationSummary(true) % <fieldset> <legend>Fields</legend> <div class="editor-label"> <%= Html.LabelFor(model => model.Person.Title) %> </div> <div class="editor-field"> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.Person.Title) %> <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Person.Title) %> </div> <div class="editor-label"> <%= Html.LabelFor(model => model.Person.Forename)%> </div> <div class="editor-field"> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.Person.Forename)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Person.Forename)%> </div> <div class="editor-label"> <%= Html.LabelFor(model => model.Person.Surname)%> </div> <div class="editor-field"> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.Person.Surname)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Person.Surname)%> </div> <div class="editor-label"> <%= Html.LabelFor(model => model.DOB) %> </div> <div class="editor-field"> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.DOB, String.Format("{0:g}", Model.DOB)) <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.DOB) %> </div>--%> <div class="editor-label"> <%= Html.LabelFor(model => model.Person.Nationality)%> </div> <div class="editor-field"> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.Person.Nationality)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Person.Nationality)%> </div> <div class="editor-label"> <%= Html.LabelFor(model => model.Person.Occupation)%> </div> <div class="editor-field"> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.Person.Occupation)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Person.Occupation)%> </div> <div class="editor-label"> <%= Html.LabelFor(model => model.Person.CountryOfResidence)%> </div> <div class="editor-field"> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.Person.CountryOfResidence)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Person.CountryOfResidence)%> </div> <div class="editor-label"> <%= Html.LabelFor(model => model.Person.PreviousNameForename)%> </div> <div class="editor-field"> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.Person.PreviousNameForename)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Person.PreviousNameForename)%> </div> <div class="editor-label"> <%= Html.LabelFor(model => model.Person.PreviousSurname)%> </div> <div class="editor-field"> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.Person.PreviousSurname)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Person.PreviousSurname)%> </div> <div class="editor-label"> <%= Html.LabelFor(model => model.Person.Email)%> </div> <div class="editor-field"> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.Person.Email)%> <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(model => model.Person.Email)%> </div> <p> <input type="submit" value="Save" /> </p> </fieldset> <% } % And the Person class looks like: [MetadataType(typeof(Person_Validation))] public partial class Person { public Person() { } } [Bind(Exclude = "ID")] public class Person_Validation { public int ID { get; private set; } public string Title { get; set; } public string Forename { get; set; } public string Surname { get; set; } public System.DateTime DOB { get; set; } public string Nationality { get; set; } public string Occupation { get; set; } public string CountryOfResidence { get; set; } public string PreviousNameForename { get; set; } public string PreviousSurname { get; set; } public string Email { get; set; } } And ViewModel: public class FormationViewModel { public Company Company { get; set; } public Address RegisteredAddress { get; set; } public Person Person { get; set; } public PersonType PersonType { get; set; } public int CurrentStep { get; set; } } }

    Read the article

  • jQuery Validate - require at least one field in a group to be filled

    - by Nathan Long
    I'm using the excellent jQuery Validate Plugin to validate some forms. On one form, I need to ensure that the user fills in at least one of a group of fields. I think I've got a pretty good solution, and wanted to share it. Please suggest any improvements you can think of. Finding no built-in way to do this, I searched and found Rebecca Murphey's custom validation method, which was very helpful. I improved this in three ways: To let you pass in a selector for the group of fields To let you specify how many of that group must be filled for validation to pass To show all inputs in the group as passing validation as soon as one of them passes validation. So you can say "at least X inputs that match selector Y must be filled." The end result is a rule like this: partnumber: { require_from_group: [2,".productinfo"] } //The partnumber input will validate if //at least 2 `.productinfo` inputs are filled For best results, put this rule AFTER any formatting rules for that field (like "must contain only numbers", etc). This way, if the user gets an error from this rule and starts filling out one of the fields, they will get immediate feedback about the formatting required without having to fill another field first. Item #3 assumes that you're adding a class of .checked to your error messages upon successful validation. You can do this as follows, as demonstrated here. success: function(label) { label.html(" ").addClass("checked"); } As in the demo linked above, I use CSS to give each span.error an X image as its background, unless it has the class .checked, in which case it gets a check mark image. Here's my code so far: jQuery.validator.addMethod("require_from_group", function(value, element, options) { // From the options array, find out what selector matches // our group of inputs and how many of them should be filled. numberRequired = options[0]; selector = options[1]; var commonParent = $(element).parents('form'); var numberFilled = 0; commonParent.find(selector).each(function(){ // Look through fields matching our selector and total up // how many of them have been filled if ($(this).val()) { numberFilled++; } }); if (numberFilled >= numberRequired) { // This part is a bit of a hack - we make these // fields look like they've passed validation by // hiding their error messages, etc. Strictly speaking, // they haven't been re-validated, though, so it's possible // that we're hiding another validation problem. But there's // no way (that I know of) to trigger actual re-validation, // and in any case, any other errors will pop back up when // the user tries to submit the form. // If anyone knows a way to re-validate, please comment. // // For imputs matching our selector, remove error class // from their text. commonParent.find(selector).removeClass('error'); // Also look for inserted error messages and mark them // with class 'checked' var remainingErrors = commonParent.find(selector) .next('label.error').not('.checked'); remainingErrors.text("").addClass('checked'); // Tell the Validate plugin that this test passed return true; } // The {0} in the next line is the 0th item in the options array }, jQuery.format("Please fill out at least {0} of these fields.")); Questions? Comments?

    Read the article

  • Asp.Net MVC EnableClientValidation doesnt work.

    - by Farrell
    I want as well as Client Side Validation as Server Side Validation. I realized this as the following: Model: ( The model has a DataModel(dbml) which contains the Test class ) namespace MyProject.TestProject { [MetadataType(typeof(TestMetaData))] public partial class Test { } public class TestMetaData { [Required(ErrorMessage="Please enter a name.")] [StringLength(50)] public string Name { get; set; } } } Controller is nothing special. The View: <% Html.EnableClientValidation(); %> <% using (Ajax.BeginForm("Index", "Test", FormMethod.Post, new AjaxOptions {}, new { enctype = "multipart/form-data" })) {%> <%= Html.AntiForgeryToken()%> <fieldset> <legend>Widget Omschrijving</legend> <div> <%= Html.LabelFor(Model => Model.Name) %> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(Model => Model.Name) %> <%= Html.ValidationMessageFor(Model => Model.Name) %> </div> </fieldset> <div> <input type="submit" value="Save" /> </div> <% } %> To make this all work I added also references to js files: <script src="../../Scripts/MicrosoftAjax.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="../../Scripts/MicrosoftMvcAjax.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="../../Scripts/MicrosoftMvcValidation.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="../../Scripts/jquery-1.4.1.min.js" type="text/javascript"></script> Eventually it has to work, but it doesnt work 100%: It does validates with no page refresh after pressing the button. It also does "half" Client Side Validation. Only when you type some text into the textbox and then backspace the typed text. The Client Side Validation appears. But when I try this by tapping between controls there's no Client Side Validation. Do I miss some reference or something? (I use Asp.Net MVC 2 RTM)

    Read the article

  • LLBLGen Pro feature highlights: grouping model elements

    - by FransBouma
    (This post is part of a series of posts about features of the LLBLGen Pro system) When working with an entity model which has more than a few entities, it's often convenient to be able to group entities together if they belong to a semantic sub-model. For example, if your entity model has several entities which are about 'security', it would be practical to group them together under the 'security' moniker. This way, you could easily find them back, yet they can be left inside the complete entity model altogether so their relationships with entities outside the group are kept. In other situations your domain consists of semi-separate entity models which all target tables/views which are located in the same database. It then might be convenient to have a single project to manage the complete target database, yet have the entity models separate of each other and have them result in separate code bases. LLBLGen Pro can do both for you. This blog post will illustrate both situations. The feature is called group usage and is controllable through the project settings. This setting is supported on all supported O/R mapper frameworks. Situation one: grouping entities in a single model. This situation is common for entity models which are dense, so many relationships exist between all sub-models: you can't split them up easily into separate models (nor do you likely want to), however it's convenient to have them grouped together into groups inside the entity model at the project level. A typical example for this is the AdventureWorks example database for SQL Server. This database, which is a single catalog, has for each sub-group a schema, however most of these schemas are tightly connected with each other: adding all schemas together will give a model with entities which indirectly are related to all other entities. LLBLGen Pro's default setting for group usage is AsVisualGroupingMechanism which is what this situation is all about: we group the elements for visual purposes, it has no real meaning for the model nor the code generated. Let's reverse engineer AdventureWorks to an entity model. By default, LLBLGen Pro uses the target schema an element is in which is being reverse engineered, as the group it will be in. This is convenient if you already have categorized tables/views in schemas, like which is the case in AdventureWorks. Of course this can be switched off, or corrected on the fly. When reverse engineering, we'll walk through a wizard which will guide us with the selection of the elements which relational model data should be retrieved, which we can later on use to reverse engineer to an entity model. The first step after specifying which database server connect to is to select these elements. below we can see the AdventureWorks catalog as well as the different schemas it contains. We'll include all of them. After the wizard completes, we have all relational model data nicely in our catalog data, with schemas. So let's reverse engineer entities from the tables in these schemas. We select in the catalog explorer the schemas 'HumanResources', 'Person', 'Production', 'Purchasing' and 'Sales', then right-click one of them and from the context menu, we select Reverse engineer Tables to Entity Definitions.... This will bring up the dialog below. We check all checkboxes in one go by checking the checkbox at the top to mark them all to be added to the project. As you can see LLBLGen Pro has already filled in the group name based on the schema name, as this is the default and we didn't change the setting. If you want, you can select multiple rows at once and set the group name to something else using the controls on the dialog. We're fine with the group names chosen so we'll simply click Add to Project. This gives the following result:   (I collapsed the other groups to keep the picture small ;)). As you can see, the entities are now grouped. Just to see how dense this model is, I've expanded the relationships of Employee: As you can see, it has relationships with entities from three other groups than HumanResources. It's not doable to cut up this project into sub-models without duplicating the Employee entity in all those groups, so this model is better suited to be used as a single model resulting in a single code base, however it benefits greatly from having its entities grouped into separate groups at the project level, to make work done on the model easier. Now let's look at another situation, namely where we work with a single database while we want to have multiple models and for each model a separate code base. Situation two: grouping entities in separate models within the same project. To get rid of the entities to see the second situation in action, simply undo the reverse engineering action in the project. We still have the AdventureWorks relational model data in the catalog. To switch LLBLGen Pro to see each group in the project as a separate project, open the Project Settings, navigate to General and set Group usage to AsSeparateProjects. In the catalog explorer, select Person and Production, right-click them and select again Reverse engineer Tables to Entities.... Again check the checkbox at the top to mark all entities to be added and click Add to Project. We get two groups, as expected, however this time the groups are seen as separate projects. This means that the validation logic inside LLBLGen Pro will see it as an error if there's e.g. a relationship or an inheritance edge linking two groups together, as that would lead to a cyclic reference in the code bases. To see this variant of the grouping feature, seeing the groups as separate projects, in action, we'll generate code from the project with the two groups we just created: select from the main menu: Project -> Generate Source-code... (or press F7 ;)). In the dialog popping up, select the target .NET framework you want to use, the template preset, fill in a destination folder and click Start Generator (normal). This will start the code generator process. As expected the code generator has simply generated two code bases, one for Person and one for Production: The group name is used inside the namespace for the different elements. This allows you to add both code bases to a single solution and use them together in a different project without problems. Below is a snippet from the code file of a generated entity class. //... using System.Xml.Serialization; using AdventureWorks.Person; using AdventureWorks.Person.HelperClasses; using AdventureWorks.Person.FactoryClasses; using AdventureWorks.Person.RelationClasses; using SD.LLBLGen.Pro.ORMSupportClasses; namespace AdventureWorks.Person.EntityClasses { //... /// <summary>Entity class which represents the entity 'Address'.<br/><br/></summary> [Serializable] public partial class AddressEntity : CommonEntityBase //... The advantage of this is that you can have two code bases and work with them separately, yet have a single target database and maintain everything in a single location. If you decide to move to a single code base, you can do so with a change of one setting. It's also useful if you want to keep the groups as separate models (and code bases) yet want to add relationships to elements from another group using a copy of the entity: you can simply reverse engineer the target table to a new entity into a different group, effectively making a copy of the entity. As there's a single target database, changes made to that database are reflected in both models which makes maintenance easier than when you'd have a separate project for each group, with its own relational model data. Conclusion LLBLGen Pro offers a flexible way to work with entities in sub-models and control how the sub-models end up in the generated code.

    Read the article

  • Entlib validation to syntax to accept only numeric month numbers?

    - by ElHaix
    I've got an enum defined as such: Private Enum AllowedMonthNumbers _1 _2 _3 _4 _5 _6 _7 _8 _9 _10 _11 _12 End Enum Then a property validator defined as: <TypeConversionValidator(GetType(Int32), MessageTemplate:="Card expiry month must be numeric.", Ruleset:="CreditCard")> _ <EnumConversionValidator(GetType(AllowedMonthNumbers), MessageTemplate:="Card expiry month must be between 1 and 12.", Ruleset:="CreditCard")> _ The validation expects "_#", as when I remove the TypeConversionValidator, it passes with setting the value to "_3" or any other number in the enum. What I need is for this to only accept b/t 1-12, and simply having numeric values in the enum won't work. Any tips? Thanks. UPDATE I replaced the EnumConversionValidator with a RangeValidator, and attempting to set the parameter to "1", but received the following error: <RangeValidator(1, RangeBoundaryType.Inclusive, 12, RangeBoundaryType.Inclusive, MessageTemplate:="..."> However that's now giving me the following error: System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException : System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapException: Server was unable to process request. ---> System.ArgumentException: Object must be of type Int32. at System.Int32.CompareTo(Object value) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.RangeChecker`1.IsInRange(T target) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.RangeValidator`1.DoValidate(T objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validator`1.DoValidate(Object objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.AndCompositeValidator.DoValidate(Object objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.ValueAccessValidator.DoValidate(Object objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.AndCompositeValidator.DoValidate(Object objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validators.GenericValidatorWrapper`1.DoValidate(T objectToValidate, Object currentTarget, String key, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validator`1.Validate(T target, ValidationResults validationResults) at Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Validation.Validation.Validate[T](T target, String[] rulesets) at ....

    Read the article

  • Globalizing ASP.NET MVC Client Validation

    One of my favorite features of ASP.NET MVC 2 is the support for client validation. Ive covered a bit about validation in the following two posts: ASP.NET MVC 2 Custom Validation covers writing a custom client validator. Localizing ASP.NET MVC Validation covers localizing error messages. However, one topic I havent covered is how validation works with globalization. A common example of this is when validating a number, the client validation should understand that users in the US enter periods...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • jQuery AJAX Validation Using The Validity Plugin

    - by schnieds
    Input validation is one of those areas that most developers view as a necessary evil. We know that it is necessary and we really do want to ensure that we get good input from our users. But most of us are lazy (me included) and input validation is one of those things that gets done but usually is a quick and dirty implementation. This is partly due to laziness and partly do to input validation being painful. Thanks to the amazing jQuery Validity plug in, input validation can be really slick, easy and robust enough to work any any scenario. I specifically like the Validity plugin because it supports jQuery AJAX input validation. Other input validation implementations that I have worked with require a form post to take place. However, if you are using jQuery.ajax methods then there isn’t a form and you need to validate the formless input. [Read More] Aaron Schniederhttp://www.churchofficeonline.com

    Read the article

  • Using Validation Groups Inside ASP.NET User Controls

    - by bipinjoshi
    Validation groups allow you to validate data entry controls in groups. Server controls such as validation controls, Button and TextBox have ValidationGroup property that takes a string value. All the server controls having the same ValidationGroup value act as one validation group. Validation groups come handy in situations where you wish to validate only a small set of controls from many controls housed on a Web Form. Using validation groups is quite easy and straightforward. However, if you have a validation group inside a user control and there are more than one user control instances on a Web Form you face some problem.http://www.binaryintellect.net/articles/13427d3d-1f98-4dc0-849b-72e95b8b66a2.aspx 

    Read the article

  • Changing Recovery Model in Replicated Database

    - by Rob
    I now am the proud owner of two servers that replicate with each other. I had nothing to do with the install, but (of course), now i have to support the databases. Both databases are in the Simple recovery model, but the users want to ensure as little data loss as possible so I'm thinking that I should change the recovery model over to full and start doing transaction log backups. I wasn't planning on backing up the subscribing database, only the publisher. Is this the right plan? Do I need to switch both the Subscriber and and the publisher to Full, or can I leave the subscriber in Simple, but have the Publisher in Full? When I change the recovery model in one (or both) do the databases need to be offline? Thanks

    Read the article

  • .Net MVC UserControl - Form values not mapped to model

    - by Andreas
    Hi I have a View that contains a usercontrol. The usercontrol is rendered using: <% Html.RenderPartial("GeneralStuff", Model.General, ViewData); %> My problem is that the usercontrol renders nicely with values from the model but when I post values edited in the usercontrol they are not mapped back to Model.General. I know I can find the values in Request.Form but I really thought that MVC would manage to map these values back to the model. My usercontrol: <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<namespace.Models.GeneralViewModel>" %> <fieldset> <div> <%= Html.LabelFor(model => model.Value)%> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(model => model.Value)%> </div> </fieldset> I'm using .Net MVC 2 Thanks for any help!

    Read the article

  • data validation on wpf passwordbox:type password, re-type password

    - by black sensei
    Hello Experts !! I've built a wpf windows application in with there is a registration form. Using IDataErrorInfo i could successfully bind the field to a class property and with the help of styles display meaningful information about the error to users.About the submit button i use the MultiDataTrigger with conditions (Based on a post here on stackoverflow).All went well. Now i need to do the same for the passwordbox and apparently it's not as straight forward.I found on wpftutorial an article and gave it a try but for some reason it wasn't working. i've tried another one from functionalfun. And in this Functionalfun case the properties(databind,databound) are not recognized as dependencyproperty even after i've changed their name as suggested somewhere in the comments plus i don't have an idea whether it will work for a windows application, since it's designed for web. to give you an idea here is some code on textboxes <Window.Resources> <data:General x:Key="recharge" /> <Style x:Key="validButton" TargetType="{x:Type Button}" BasedOn="{StaticResource {x:Type Button}}" > <Setter Property="IsEnabled" Value="False"/> <Style.Triggers> <MultiDataTrigger> <MultiDataTrigger.Conditions> <Condition Binding="{Binding ElementName=txtRecharge, Path=(Validation.HasError)}" Value="false" /> </MultiDataTrigger.Conditions> <Setter Property="IsEnabled" Value="True" /> </MultiDataTrigger> </Style.Triggers> </Style> <Style x:Key="txtboxerrors" TargetType="{x:Type TextBox}" BasedOn="{StaticResource {x:Type TextBox}}"> <Style.Triggers> <Trigger Property="Validation.HasError" Value="true"> <Setter Property="ToolTip" Value="{Binding RelativeSource={RelativeSource Self}, Path=(Validation.Errors)[0].ErrorContent}"/> <Setter Property="Validation.ErrorTemplate"> <Setter.Value> <ControlTemplate> <DockPanel LastChildFill="True"> <TextBlock DockPanel.Dock="Bottom" FontSize="8" FontWeight="ExtraBold" Foreground="red" Padding="5 0 0 0" Text="{Binding ElementName=showerror, Path=AdornedElement.(Validation.Errors)[0].ErrorContent}"></TextBlock> <Border BorderBrush="Red" BorderThickness="2"> <AdornedElementPlaceholder Name="showerror" /> </Border> </DockPanel> </ControlTemplate> </Setter.Value> </Setter> </Trigger> </Style.Triggers> </Style> </Window.Resources> <TextBox Margin="12,69,12,70" Name="txtRecharge" Style="{StaticResource txtboxerrors}"> <TextBox.Text> <Binding Path="Field" Source="{StaticResource recharge}" ValidatesOnDataErrors="True" UpdateSourceTrigger="PropertyChanged"> <Binding.ValidationRules> <ExceptionValidationRule /> </Binding.ValidationRules> </Binding> </TextBox.Text> </TextBox> <Button Height="23" Margin="98,0,0,12" Name="btnRecharge" VerticalAlignment="Bottom" Click="btnRecharge_Click" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Width="75" Style="{StaticResource validButton}">Recharge</Button> some C# : class General : IDataErrorInfo { private string _field; public string this[string columnName] { get { string result = null; if(columnName == "Field") { if(Util.NullOrEmtpyCheck(this._field)) { result = "Field cannot be Empty"; } } return result; } } public string Error { get { return null; } } public string Field { get { return _field; } set { _field = value; } } } So what are suggestion you guys have for me? I mean how would you go about this? how do you do this since the databinding first purpose here is not to load data onto the fields they are just (for now) for data validation. thanks for reading this.

    Read the article

  • Model validation with enumerable properties in Asp.net MVC2 RTM

    - by Robert Koritnik
    I'm using DataAnnotations attributes to validate my model objects. My model class looks similar to this: public class MyModel { [Required] public string Title { get; set; } [Required] public List<User> Editors { get; set; } } public class User { public int Id { get; set; } [Required] public string FullName { get; set; } [Required] [DataType(DataType.Email)] public string Email { get; set; } } My controller action looks like: public ActionResult NewItem(MyModel data) { //... } User is presented with a view that has a form with: a text box with dummy name where users enter user's names. For each user they enter, there's a client script coupled with ajax that creates an <input type="hidden" name="data.Editors[0].Id" value="userId" /> for each user entered (enumeration index is therefore not always 0 as written here), so default model binder is able to consume and bind the form without any problems. a text box where users enter the title Since I'm using Asp.net MVC 2 RTM which does model validation instead of input validation I don't know how to avoid validation errors. The thing is I have to use BindAttribute on my controller action. I would have to either provide a white or a black list of properties. It's always a better practice to provide a white list. It's also more future proof. The problem My form works fine, but I get validation errors about user's FullName and Email properties since they are not provided. I also shouldn't feed them to the client (via ajax when user enters user data), because email is personal contact data and is not shared between users. If there was just a single user reference on MyModel I would write [Bind(Include = "Title, Editor.Id")] But I have an enumeration of them. How do I provide Bind white list to work with my model?

    Read the article

  • Validation Summary for Lists using Data Annotations with MVC

    - by David Liddle
    I currently use a custom method to display validation error messages for lists but would like to replace this system for using with Data Annotations. In summary on validation of my form, I want to display "*" next to each input that is incorrect and also provide a Validation Summary at the bottom that relates each error message to the particular item in the list. e.g. say if validation failed on the 2nd list item on a Name input box and the 4th item on an Address input box the validation summary would display [2] Name is invalid [4] Address is invalid Please ignore if there are mistakes in the code below. I'm just writing this as an example. The code below shows how I was able to do it using my custom version of adding model errors but was wondering how to do this using Data Annotations? //Domain Object public class MyObject { public int ID { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public string Address { get; set; } public bool IsValid { get { return (GetRuleViolations().Count() == 0); } } public void IEnumerable<RuleViolation> GetRuleViolations() { if (String.IsNullOrEmpty(Name)) yield return new RuleViolation(ID, "Name", "Name is invalid"); if (String.IsNullOrEmpty(Address)) yield return new RuleViolation(ID, "Address", "Address is invalid"); yield break; } } //Rule Violation public class RuleViolation { public int ID { get; private set; } public string PropertyName { get; private set; } public string ErrorMessage { get; private set; } } //View <% for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { %> <p> <%= Html.Hidden("myObjects[" + i + "].ID", i) %> Name: <%= Html.TextBox("myObjects[" + i + "].Name") %> <br /> <%= Html.ValidationMessage("myObjects[" + i + "].Name", "*")<br /> Address: <%= Html.TextBox("myObjects[" + i + "].Address") %> <%= Html.ValidationMessage("myObjects[" + i + "].Address", "*")<br /> </p> <% } %> <p><%= Html.ValidationSummary() %> //Controller public ActionResult MyAction(IList<MyObject> myObjects) { foreach (MyObject o in myObjects) { if (!o.IsValid) ModelState.AddModelErrors(o.GetRuleViolations(), o.GetType().Name); } if (!Model.IsValid) { return View(); } } public static class ModelStateExtensions { public static void AddModelError(this ModelStateDictionary modelState, RuleViolation issue, string name) { string key = String.Format("{0}[{1}].{2}", name, issue.ID, issue.PropertyName); string error = String.Format("[{0}] {1}", (issue.ID + 1), issue.ErrorMessage); //above line determines the [ID] ErrorMessage to be //displayed in the Validation Summary modelState.AddModelError(key, error); }

    Read the article

  • Model validation with enumerations

    - by Robert Koritnik
    I'm using DataAnnotations attributes to validate my model objects. My model class looks similar to this: public class MyModel { [Required] public string Title { get; set; } [Required] public List<User> Editors { get; set; } } public class User { public int Id { get; set; } [Required] public string FullName { get; set; } [Required] [DataType(DataType.Email)] public string Email { get; set; } } My controller action looks like: public ActionResult NewItem(MyModel data) { //... } User is presented with a view that has a form with: a text box with dummy name where users enter user's names. For each user they enter, there's a client script coupled with ajax that creates an <input type="hidden" name="data.Editors[0].Id" value="userId" /> for each user entered (enumeration index is therefore not always 0 as written here), so default model binder is able to consume and bind the form without any problems. a text box where users enter the title Since I'm using Asp.net MVC 2 RTM which does model validation instead of input validation I don't know how to avoid validation errors. The thing is I have to use BindAttribute on my controller action. I would have to either provide a white or a black list of properties. It's always a better practice to provide a white list. It's also more future proof. The problem My form works fine, but I get validation errors about user's FullName and Email properties since they are not provided. I also shouldn't feed them to the client (via ajax when user enters user data), because email is personal contact data and is not shared between users. If there was just a single user reference on MyModel I would write [Bind(Include = "Title, Editor.Id")] But I have an enumeration of them. How do I provide Bind white list to work with my model?

    Read the article

  • Django Formset validation with an optional ForeignKey field

    - by Camilo Díaz
    Having a ModelFormSet built with modelformset_factory and using a model with an optional ForeignKey, how can I make empty (null) associations to validate on that form? Here is a sample code: ### model class Prueba(models.Model): cliente = models.ForeignKey(Cliente, null = True) valor = models.CharField(max_length = 20) ### view def test(request): PruebaFormSet = modelformset_factory(model = Prueba, extra = 1) if request.method == 'GET': formset = PruebaFormSet() return render_to_response('tpls/test.html', {'formset' : formset}, context_instance = RequestContext(request)) else: formset = PruebaFormSet(request.POST) # dumb tests, just to know if validating if formset.is_valid(): return HttpResponse('0') else: return HttpResponse('1') In my template, i'm just calling the {{ form.cliente }} method which renders the combo field, however, I want to be able to choose an empty (labeled "------") value, as the FK is optional... but when the form gets submitted it doesn't validate. Is this normal behaviour? How can i make this field to skip required validation?

    Read the article

  • Asp.Net MVC2 Clientside Validation problem with controls with prefixes

    - by alexander
    The problem is: when I put 2 controls of the same type on a page I need to specify different prefixes for binding. In this case the validation rules generated right after the form are incorrect. So how to get client validation work for the case?: the page contains: <% Html.RenderPartial(ViewLocations.Shared.PhoneEditPartial, new PhoneViewModel { Phone = person.PhonePhone, Prefix = "PhonePhone" }); Html.RenderPartial(ViewLocations.Shared.PhoneEditPartial, new PhoneViewModel { Phone = person.FaxPhone, Prefix = "FaxPhone" }); %> the control ViewUserControl<PhoneViewModel>: <%= Html.TextBox(Model.GetPrefixed("CountryCode"), Model.Phone.CountryCode) %> <%= Html.ValidationMessage("Phone.CountryCode", new { id = Model.GetPrefixed("CountryCode"), name = Model.GetPrefixed("CountryCode") })%> where Model.GetPrefixed("CountryCode") just returns "FaxPhone.CountryCode" or "PhonePhone.CountryCode" depending on prefix And here is the validation rules generated after the form. They are duplicated for the field name "Phone.CountryCode". While the desired result is 2 rules (required, number) for each of the FieldNames "FaxPhone.CountryCode", "PhonePhone.CountryCode" The question is somewhat duplicate of http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2675606/asp-net-mvc2-clientside-validation-and-duplicate-ids-problem but the advise to manually generate ids doesn't helps.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >