Search Results

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

Page 3/658 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • WPF Validation of clipboard Data

    - by Peter
    Hello normal validation is always related to some control, but in my case there is no control to fire validation when its content changes and to show errortemplate to the user. because the data to be validated is in the cipboard. when the user presses "PASTE" button viewmodel processes the data and finds it to be invalid. but what is the best way to invoke WPF validation in this case? as far as i understand using IDataErrorInfo is the way to go, but what is the best way to start validation. and whst is the best way of displaying the error? errortemplate of the button element? Thanks a lot for help. Peter

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC - Add XHTML into validation error messages

    - by Neil
    Hi, Just starting with ASP.Net MVC and have hit a bit of a snag regarding validation messages. I've a custom validation attribute assigned to my class validate several properties on my model. When this validation fails, we'd like the error message to contain XHTML mark-up, including a link to help page, (this was done in the original WebForms project as a ASP:Panel). At the moment the XHTML tags such as "< a ", in the ErrorMessage are being rendered to the screen. Is there any way to get the ValidationSummary to render the XHTML markup correctly? Or is there a better way to handle this kind of validation? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Class-Level Model Validation with EF Code First and ASP.NET MVC 3

    - by ScottGu
    Earlier this week the data team released the CTP5 build of the new Entity Framework Code-First library.  In my blog post a few days ago I talked about a few of the improvements introduced with the new CTP5 build.  Automatic support for enforcing DataAnnotation validation attributes on models was one of the improvements I discussed.  It provides a pretty easy way to enable property-level validation logic within your model layer. You can apply validation attributes like [Required], [Range], and [RegularExpression] – all of which are built-into .NET 4 – to your model classes in order to enforce that the model properties are valid before they are persisted to a database.  You can also create your own custom validation attributes (like this cool [CreditCard] validator) and have them be automatically enforced by EF Code First as well.  This provides a really easy way to validate property values on your models.  I showed some code samples of this in action in my previous post. Class-Level Model Validation using IValidatableObject DataAnnotation attributes provides an easy way to validate individual property values on your model classes.  Several people have asked - “Does EF Code First also support a way to implement class-level validation methods on model objects, for validation rules than need to span multiple property values?”  It does – and one easy way you can enable this is by implementing the IValidatableObject interface on your model classes. IValidatableObject.Validate() Method Below is an example of using the IValidatableObject interface (which is built-into .NET 4 within the System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations namespace) to implement two custom validation rules on a Product model class.  The two rules ensure that: New units can’t be ordered if the Product is in a discontinued state New units can’t be ordered if there are already more than 100 units in stock We will enforce these business rules by implementing the IValidatableObject interface on our Product class, and by implementing its Validate() method like so: The IValidatableObject.Validate() method can apply validation rules that span across multiple properties, and can yield back multiple validation errors. Each ValidationResult returned can supply both an error message as well as an optional list of property names that caused the violation (which is useful when displaying error messages within UI). Automatic Validation Enforcement EF Code-First (starting with CTP5) now automatically invokes the Validate() method when a model object that implements the IValidatableObject interface is saved.  You do not need to write any code to cause this to happen – this support is now enabled by default. This new support means that the below code – which violates one of our above business rules – will automatically throw an exception (and abort the transaction) when we call the “SaveChanges()” method on our Northwind DbContext: In addition to reactively handling validation exceptions, EF Code First also allows you to proactively check for validation errors.  Starting with CTP5, you can call the “GetValidationErrors()” method on the DbContext base class to retrieve a list of validation errors within the model objects you are working with.  GetValidationErrors() will return a list of all validation errors – regardless of whether they are generated via DataAnnotation attributes or by an IValidatableObject.Validate() implementation.  Below is an example of proactively using the GetValidationErrors() method to check (and handle) errors before trying to call SaveChanges(): ASP.NET MVC 3 and IValidatableObject ASP.NET MVC 2 included support for automatically honoring and enforcing DataAnnotation attributes on model objects that are used with ASP.NET MVC’s model binding infrastructure.  ASP.NET MVC 3 goes further and also honors the IValidatableObject interface.  This combined support for model validation makes it easy to display appropriate error messages within forms when validation errors occur.  To see this in action, let’s consider a simple Create form that allows users to create a new Product: We can implement the above Create functionality using a ProductsController class that has two “Create” action methods like below: The first Create() method implements a version of the /Products/Create URL that handles HTTP-GET requests - and displays the HTML form to fill-out.  The second Create() method implements a version of the /Products/Create URL that handles HTTP-POST requests - and which takes the posted form data, ensures that is is valid, and if it is valid saves it in the database.  If there are validation issues it redisplays the form with the posted values.  The razor view template of our “Create” view (which renders the form) looks like below: One of the nice things about the above Controller + View implementation is that we did not write any validation logic within it.  The validation logic and business rules are instead implemented entirely within our model layer, and the ProductsController simply checks whether it is valid (by calling the ModelState.IsValid helper method) to determine whether to try and save the changes or redisplay the form with errors. The Html.ValidationMessageFor() helper method calls within our view simply display the error messages our Product model’s DataAnnotations and IValidatableObject.Validate() method returned.  We can see the above scenario in action by filling out invalid data within the form and attempting to submit it: Notice above how when we hit the “Create” button we got an error message.  This was because we ticked the “Discontinued” checkbox while also entering a value for the UnitsOnOrder (and so violated one of our business rules).  You might ask – how did ASP.NET MVC know to highlight and display the error message next to the UnitsOnOrder textbox?  It did this because ASP.NET MVC 3 now honors the IValidatableObject interface when performing model binding, and will retrieve the error messages from validation failures with it. The business rule within our Product model class indicated that the “UnitsOnOrder” property should be highlighted when the business rule we hit was violated: Our Html.ValidationMessageFor() helper method knew to display the business rule error message (next to the UnitsOnOrder edit box) because of the above property name hint we supplied: Keeping things DRY ASP.NET MVC and EF Code First enables you to keep your validation and business rules in one place (within your model layer), and avoid having it creep into your Controllers and Views.  Keeping the validation logic in the model layer helps ensure that you do not duplicate validation/business logic as you add more Controllers and Views to your application.  It allows you to quickly change your business rules/validation logic in one single place (within your model layer) – and have all controllers/views across your application immediately reflect it.  This help keep your application code clean and easily maintainable, and makes it much easier to evolve and update your application in the future. Summary EF Code First (starting with CTP5) now has built-in support for both DataAnnotations and the IValidatableObject interface.  This allows you to easily add validation and business rules to your models, and have EF automatically ensure that they are enforced anytime someone tries to persist changes of them to a database.  ASP.NET MVC 3 also now supports both DataAnnotations and IValidatableObject as well, which makes it even easier to use them with your EF Code First model layer – and then have the controllers/views within your web layer automatically honor and support them as well.  This makes it easy to build clean and highly maintainable applications. You don’t have to use DataAnnotations or IValidatableObject to perform your validation/business logic.  You can always roll your own custom validation architecture and/or use other more advanced validation frameworks/patterns if you want.  But for a lot of applications this built-in support will probably be sufficient – and provide a highly productive way to build solutions. Hope this helps, Scott P.S. In addition to blogging, I am also now using Twitter for quick updates and to share links. Follow me at: twitter.com/scottgu

    Read the article

  • jQuery Validation Plugin - Enable 'Eager' Validation only after and Invalid Submit

    - by Ryan Fitzer
    By default, if a user enters a value in a field, the 'eager' validation kicks in. Is there any way to disable 'eager' validation before submit and then enable it after an invalid submit has happened? I've used $.validator.setDefaults() to initially set the onkeyup and onfocusout properties to false. In the invalidHandler method I rerun the $.validator.setDefaults(), setting onkeyup and onfocusout properties to true. No luck with this approach. Basically, I only want the 'eager' validation to take place after the user tries to submit an invalid form. Thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • Domain object validation vs view model validation

    - by Brendan Vogt
    I am using ASP.NET MVC 3 and I am using FluentValidation to validate my view models. I am just a little concerned that I might not be on the correct track. As far as what I know, model validation should be done on the domain object. Now with MVC you might have multiple view models that are similar that needs validation. What happens if a property from a domain object occurs in more than one view model? Now you are validating the same property twice, and they might not even be in sync. So if I have a User domain object then I would like to do validation on this object. Now what happens if I have UserAViewModel and UserBViewModel, so now it is multiple validations that needs to be done. The scenario above is just an example, so please don't critise on it.

    Read the article

  • Unobtrusive Client Side Validation with Dynamic Contents in ASP.NET MVC 3

    - by imran_ku07
        Introduction:          A while ago, I blogged about how to perform client side validation for dynamic contents in ASP.NET MVC 2 at here. Using the approach given in that blog, you can easily validate your dynamic ajax contents at client side. ASP.NET MVC 3 also supports unobtrusive client side validation in addition to ASP.NET MVC 2 client side validation for backward compatibility. I feel it is worth to rewrite that blog post for ASP.NET MVC 3 unobtrusive client side validation. In this article I will show you how to do this.       Description:           I am going to use the same example presented at here. Create a new ASP.NET MVC 3 application. Then just open HomeController.cs and add the following code,   public ActionResult CreateUser() { return View(); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult CreateUserPrevious(UserInformation u) { return View("CreateUserInformation", u); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult CreateUserInformation(UserInformation u) { if(ModelState.IsValid) return View("CreateUserCompanyInformation"); return View("CreateUserInformation"); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult CreateUserCompanyInformation(UserCompanyInformation uc, UserInformation ui) { if (ModelState.IsValid) return Content("Thank you for submitting your information"); return View("CreateUserCompanyInformation"); }             Next create a CreateUser view and add the following lines,   <%@ Page Title="" Language="C#" MasterPageFile="~/Views/Shared/Site.Master" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage<UnobtrusiveValidationWithDynamicContents.Models.UserInformation>" %> <asp:Content ID="Content1" ContentPlaceHolderID="TitleContent" runat="server"> CreateUser </asp:Content> <asp:Content ID="Content2" ContentPlaceHolderID="MainContent" runat="server"> <div id="dynamicData"> <%Html.RenderPartial("CreateUserInformation"); %> </div> </asp:Content>             Next create a CreateUserInformation partial view and add the following lines,   <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<UnobtrusiveValidationWithDynamicContents.Models.UserInformation>" %> <% Html.EnableClientValidation(); %> <%using (Html.BeginForm("CreateUserInformation", "Home")) { %> <table id="table1"> <tr style="background-color:#E8EEF4;font-weight:bold"> <td colspan="3" align="center"> User Information </td> </tr> <tr> <td> First Name </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.FirstName)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.FirstName)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Last Name </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.LastName)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.LastName)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Email </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.Email)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.Email)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" align="center"> <input type="submit" name="userInformation" value="Next"/> </td> </tr> </table> <%} %> <script type="text/javascript"> $("form").submit(function (e) { if ($(this).valid()) { $.post('<%= Url.Action("CreateUserInformation")%>', $(this).serialize(), function (data) { $("#dynamicData").html(data); $.validator.unobtrusive.parse($("#dynamicData")); }); } e.preventDefault(); }); </script>             Next create a CreateUserCompanyInformation partial view and add the following lines,   <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<UnobtrusiveValidationWithDynamicContents.Models.UserCompanyInformation>" %> <% Html.EnableClientValidation(); %> <%using (Html.BeginForm("CreateUserCompanyInformation", "Home")) { %> <table id="table1"> <tr style="background-color:#E8EEF4;font-weight:bold"> <td colspan="3" align="center"> User Company Information </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Company Name </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.CompanyName)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.CompanyName)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Company Address </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.CompanyAddress)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.CompanyAddress)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Designation </td> <td> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(a => a.Designation)%> </td> <td> <%=Html.ValidationMessageFor(a => a.Designation)%> </td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" align="center"> <input type="button" id="prevButton" value="Previous"/>   <input type="submit" name="userCompanyInformation" value="Next"/> <%=Html.Hidden("FirstName")%> <%=Html.Hidden("LastName")%> <%=Html.Hidden("Email")%> </td> </tr> </table> <%} %> <script type="text/javascript"> $("#prevButton").click(function () { $.post('<%= Url.Action("CreateUserPrevious")%>', $($("form")[0]).serialize(), function (data) { $("#dynamicData").html(data); $.validator.unobtrusive.parse($("#dynamicData")); }); }); $("form").submit(function (e) { if ($(this).valid()) { $.post('<%= Url.Action("CreateUserCompanyInformation")%>', $(this).serialize(), function (data) { $("#dynamicData").html(data); $.validator.unobtrusive.parse($("#dynamicData")); }); } e.preventDefault(); }); </script>             Next create a new class file UserInformation.cs inside Model folder and add the following code,   public class UserInformation { public int Id { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "First Name is required")] [StringLength(10, ErrorMessage = "First Name max length is 10")] public string FirstName { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Last Name is required")] [StringLength(10, ErrorMessage = "Last Name max length is 10")] public string LastName { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Email is required")] [RegularExpression(@"^\w+([-+.']\w+)*@\w+([-.]\w+)*\.\w+([-.]\w+)*$", ErrorMessage = "Email Format is wrong")] public string Email { get; set; } }             Next create a new class file UserCompanyInformation.cs inside Model folder and add the following code,    public class UserCompanyInformation { public int UserId { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Company Name is required")] [StringLength(10, ErrorMessage = "Company Name max length is 10")] public string CompanyName { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "CompanyAddress is required")] [StringLength(50, ErrorMessage = "Company Address max length is 50")] public string CompanyAddress { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Designation is required")] [StringLength(50, ErrorMessage = "Designation max length is 10")] public string Designation { get; set; } }            Next add the necessary script files in Site.Master,   <script src="<%= Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery-1.4.4.min.js")%>" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="<%= Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery.validate.min.js")%>" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="<%= Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery.validate.unobtrusive.min.js")%>" type="text/javascript"></script>            Now run this application. You will get the same behavior as described in this article. The key important feature to note here is the $.validator.unobtrusive.parse method, which is used by ASP.NET MVC 3 unobtrusive client side validation to initialize jQuery validation plug-in to start the client side validation process. Another important method to note here is the jQuery.valid method which return true if the form is valid and return false if the form is not valid .       Summary:          There may be several occasions when you need to load your HTML contents dynamically. These dynamic HTML contents may also include some input elements and you need to perform some client side validation for these input elements before posting thier values to server. In this article I shows you how you can enable client side validation for dynamic input elements in ASP.NET MVC 3. I am also attaching a sample application. Hopefully you will enjoy this article too.   SyntaxHighlighter.all()

    Read the article

  • Is realtime validation of username good or bad?

    - by iamserious
    I have a simple form for the user to sign up to my site; with email, username and password fields. We are now trying to implement an ajax validation so the user doesn't have to post the form to find out if the username is already taken. I can do this either on keyup event or on text blur event. My question is, which of these is really the best way to do? Keyup From the user POV, it would be good if the validation is done as and when they are typing, (on key up event) - of course, I am waiting for half a second to see if the user stops typing before firing off the request, and user can make any adjustments immediately. But this means I am sending way more requests than if I validated the username on Blur event. Blur The number of requests will be much lower when the validation is done on blur event, But this means the user has to actually go away from the textbox, look at the validation result, and if necessary go back to it to make any changes and repeat the whole process until he gets it right. I had a quick look at google, tumblr, twitter and no one actually does username validations on keyup events, (heck, tubmlr waits for the form to be posted) but I can swear I have seen keyup validations in a lot of places too. So, coming back to the question, will keyup validations be too many for server, is it an unnecessary overhead? or is it worth taking these hits to give user a better experience? ps: all my regex validations etc are already done on javascript and only when it passes all these other criteria does it send a request to server to check if a username already exists. (And the server is doing a select count(1) from user where username = '' - nothing substantial, but still enough to occupy some resource) pps: I'm on asp.net, MS SQL stack., if that matters.

    Read the article

  • ISO 12207 - testing being only validation activity? [closed]

    - by user970696
    Possible Duplicate: How come verification does not include actual testing? ISO norm 12207 states that testing is only validation activity, while all static inspections are verification (that requirement, code.. is complete, correct..). I did found some articles saying its not correct but you know, it is not "official". I would like to understand because there are two different concepts (in books & articles): 1) Verification is all testing except for UAT (because only user can really validate the use). E.g. here OR 2) Verification is everything but testing. All testing is validation. E.g. here Definitions are mostly the same, as Sommerville's: The aim of verification is to check that the software meets its stated functional and non-functional requirements. Validation, however, is a more general process. The aim of validation is to ensure that the software meets the customer’s expectations. It goes beyond simply checking conformance with the specification to demonstrating that the software does what the customer expects it to do It is really bugging me because I tend to agree that functional testing done on a product (SIT) is still verification because I just follow the requirements. But ISO does not agree..

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Postbacks and HtmlHelper Controls ignoring Model Changes

    - by Rick Strahl
    So here's a binding behavior in ASP.NET MVC that I didn't really get until today: HtmlHelpers controls (like .TextBoxFor() etc.) don't bind to model values on Postback, but rather get their value directly out of the POST buffer from ModelState. Effectively it looks like you can't change the display value of a control via model value updates on a Postback operation. To demonstrate here's an example. I have a small section in a document where I display an editable email address: This is what the form displays on a GET operation and as expected I get the email value displayed in both the textbox and plain value display below, which reflects the value in the mode. I added a plain text value to demonstrate the model value compared to what's rendered in the textbox. The relevant markup is the email address which needs to be manipulated via the model in the Controller code. Here's the Razor markup: <div class="fieldcontainer"> <label> Email: &nbsp; <small>(username and <a href="http://gravatar.com">Gravatar</a> image)</small> </label> <div> @Html.TextBoxFor( mod=> mod.User.Email, new {type="email",@class="inputfield"}) @Model.User.Email </div> </div>   So, I have this form and the user can change their email address. On postback the Post controller code then asks the business layer whether the change is allowed. If it's not I want to reset the email address back to the old value which exists in the database and was previously store. The obvious thing to do would be to modify the model. Here's the Controller logic block that deals with that:// did user change email? if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(oldEmail) && user.Email != oldEmail) { if (userBus.DoesEmailExist(user.Email)) { userBus.ValidationErrors.Add("New email address exists already. Please…"); user.Email = oldEmail; } else // allow email change but require verification by forcing a login user.IsVerified = false; }… model.user = user; return View(model); The logic is straight forward - if the new email address is not valid because it already exists I don't want to display the new email address the user entered, but rather the old one. To do this I change the value on the model which effectively does this:model.user.Email = oldEmail; return View(model); So when I press the Save button after entering in my new email address ([email protected]) here's what comes back in the rendered view: Notice that the textbox value and the raw displayed model value are different. The TextBox displays the POST value, the raw value displays the actual model value which are different. This means that MVC renders the textbox value from the POST data rather than from the view data when an Http POST is active. Now I don't know about you but this is not the behavior I expected - initially. This behavior effectively means that I cannot modify the contents of the textbox from the Controller code if using HtmlHelpers for binding. Updating the model for display purposes in a POST has in effect - no effect. (Apr. 25, 2012 - edited the post heavily based on comments and more experimentation) What should the behavior be? After getting quite a few comments on this post I quickly realized that the behavior I described above is actually the behavior you'd want in 99% of the binding scenarios. You do want to get the POST values back into your input controls at all times, so that the data displayed on a form for the user matches what they typed. So if an error occurs, the error doesn't mysteriously disappear getting replaced either with a default value or some value that you changed on the model on your own. Makes sense. Still it is a little non-obvious because the way you create the UI elements with MVC, it certainly looks like your are binding to the model value:@Html.TextBoxFor( mod=> mod.User.Email, new {type="email",@class="inputfield",required="required" }) and so unless one understands a little bit about how the model binder works this is easy to trip up. At least it was for me. Even though I'm telling the control which model value to bind to, that model value is only used initially on GET operations. After that ModelState/POST values provide the display value. Workarounds The default behavior should be fine for 99% of binding scenarios. But if you do need fix up values based on your model rather than the default POST values, there are a number of ways that you can work around this. Initially when I ran into this, I couldn't figure out how to set the value using code and so the simplest solution to me was simply to not use the MVC Html Helper for the specific control and explicitly bind the model via HTML markup and @Razor expression: <input type="text" name="User.Email" id="User_Email" value="@Model.User.Email" /> And this produces the right result. This is easy enough to create, but feels a little out of place when using the @Html helpers for everything else. As you can see by the difference in the name and id values, you also are forced to remember the naming conventions that MVC imposes in order for ModelBinding to work properly which is a pain to remember and set manually (name is the same as the property with . syntax, id replaces dots with underlines). Use the ModelState Some of my original confusion came because I didn't understand how the model binder works. The model binder basically maintains ModelState on a postback, which holds a value and binding errors for each of the Post back value submitted on the page that can be mapped to the model. In other words there's one ModelState entry for each bound property of the model. Each ModelState entry contains a value property that holds AttemptedValue and RawValue properties. The AttemptedValue is essentially the POST value retrieved from the form. The RawValue is the value that the model holds. When MVC binds controls like @Html.TextBoxFor() or @Html.TextBox(), it always binds values on a GET operation. On a POST operation however, it'll always used the AttemptedValue to display the control. MVC binds using the ModelState on a POST operation, not the model's value. So, if you want the behavior that I was expecting originally you can actually get it by clearing the ModelState in the controller code:ModelState.Clear(); This clears out all the captured ModelState values, and effectively binds to the model. Note this will produce very similar results - in fact if there are no binding errors you see exactly the same behavior as if binding from ModelState, because the model has been updated from the ModelState already and binding to the updated values most likely produces the same values you would get with POST back values. The big difference though is that any values that couldn't bind - like say putting a string into a numeric field - will now not display back the value the user typed, but the default field value or whatever you changed the model value to. This is the behavior I was actually expecting previously. But - clearing out all values might be a bit heavy handed. You might want to fix up one or two values in a model but rarely would you want the entire model to update from the model. So, you can also clear out individual values on an as needed basis:if (userBus.DoesEmailExist(user.Email)) { userBus.ValidationErrors.Add("New email address exists already. Please…"); user.Email = oldEmail; ModelState.Remove("User.Email"); } This allows you to remove a single value from the ModelState and effectively allows you to replace that value for display from the model. Why? While researching this I came across a post from Microsoft's Brad Wilson who describes the default binding behavior best in a forum post: The reason we use the posted value for editors rather than the model value is that the model may not be able to contain the value that the user typed. Imagine in your "int" editor the user had typed "dog". You want to display an error message which says "dog is not valid", and leave "dog" in the editor field. However, your model is an int: there's no way it can store "dog". So we keep the old value. If you don't want the old values in the editor, clear out the Model State. That's where the old value is stored and pulled from the HTML helpers. There you have it. It's not the most intuitive behavior, but in hindsight this behavior does make some sense even if at first glance it looks like you should be able to update values from the model. The solution of clearing ModelState works and is a reasonable one but you have to know about some of the innards of ModelState and how it actually works to figure that out.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in ASP.NET  MVC   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Tips on ensuring Model Quality

    - by [email protected]
    Given enough data that represents well the domain and models that reflect exactly the decision being optimized, models usually provide good predictions that ensure lift. Nevertheless, sometimes the modeling situation is less than ideal. In this blog entry we explore the problems found in a few such situations and how to avoid them.1 - The Model does not reflect the problem you are trying to solveFor example, you may be trying to solve the problem: "What product should I recommend to this customer" but your model learns on the problem: "Given that a customer has acquired our products, what is the likelihood for each product". In this case the model you built may be too far of a proxy for the problem you are really trying to solve. What you could do in this case is try to build a model based on the result from recommendations of products to customers. If there is not enough data from actual recommendations, you could use a hybrid approach in which you would use the [bad] proxy model until the recommendation model converges.2 - Data is not predictive enoughIf the inputs are not correlated with the output then the models may be unable to provide good predictions. For example, if the input is the phase of the moon and the weather and the output is what car did the customer buy, there may be no correlations found. In this case you should see a low quality model.The solution in this case is to include more relevant inputs.3 - Not enough cases seenIf the data learned does not include enough cases, at least 200 positive examples for each output, then the quality of recommendations may be low. The obvious solution is to include more data records. If this is not possible, then it may be possible to build a model based on the characteristics of the output choices rather than the choices themselves. For example, instead of using products as output, use the product category, price and brand name, and then combine these models.4 - Output leaking into input giving the false impression of good quality modelsIf the input data in the training includes values that have changed or are available only because the output happened, then you will find some strong correlations between the input and the output, but these strong correlations do not reflect the data that you will have available at decision (prediction) time. For example, if you are building a model to predict whether a web site visitor will succeed in registering, and the input includes the variable DaysSinceRegistration, and you learn when this variable has already been set, you will probably see a big correlation between having a Zero (or one) in this variable and the fact that registration was successful.The solution is to remove these variables from the input or make sure they reflect the value as of the time of decision and not after the result is known. 

    Read the article

  • Kohana 3: Example of model with validation

    - by Svish
    I find examples and tutorials about models and about validation. And I places that say the validation (or most of it at least) should be in the model, which I agree with. But I can't any examples or tutorials that show how that should be done. Could anyone help me with a simple example on how that could be done? Where would you have the rules in the model? Where would the validation happen? How would the controller know if the validation passed or fail? How would the controller get error messages and things like that? Hope someone can help, cause feel a bit lost here :p

    Read the article

  • client-side validation in custom validation attribute - asp.net mvc 4

    - by Giorgos Manoltzas
    I have followed some articles and tutorials over the internet in order to create a custom validation attribute that also supports client-side validation in an asp.net mvc 4 website. This is what i have until now: RequiredIfAttribute.cs [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property, AllowMultiple = true)] //Added public class RequiredIfAttribute : ValidationAttribute, IClientValidatable { private readonly string condition; private string propertyName; //Added public RequiredIfAttribute(string condition) { this.condition = condition; this.propertyName = propertyName; //Added } protected override ValidationResult IsValid(object value, ValidationContext validationContext) { PropertyInfo propertyInfo = validationContext.ObjectType.GetProperty(this.propertyName); //Added Delegate conditionFunction = CreateExpression(validationContext.ObjectType, _condition); bool conditionMet = (bool)conditionFunction.DynamicInvoke(validationContext.ObjectInstance); if (conditionMet) { if (value == null) { return new ValidationResult(FormatErrorMessage(null)); } } return ValidationResult.Success; } private Delegate CreateExpression(Type objectType, string expression) { LambdaExpression lambdaExpression = System.Linq.Dynamic.DynamicExpression.ParseLambda(objectType, typeof(bool), expression); //Added Delegate function = lambdaExpression.Compile(); return function; } public IEnumerable<ModelClientValidationRule> GetClientValidationRules(ModelMetadata metadata, ControllerContext context) { var modelClientValidationRule = new ModelClientValidationRule { ValidationType = "requiredif", ErrorMessage = ErrorMessage //Added }; modelClientValidationRule.ValidationParameters.Add("param", this.propertyName); //Added return new List<ModelClientValidationRule> { modelClientValidationRule }; } } Then i applied this attribute in a property of a class like this [RequiredIf("InAppPurchase == true", "InAppPurchase", ErrorMessage = "Please enter an in app purchase promotional price")] //Added "InAppPurchase" public string InAppPurchasePromotionalPrice { get; set; } public bool InAppPurchase { get; set; } So what i want to do is display an error message that field InAppPurchasePromotionalPrice is required when InAppPurchase field is true (that means checked in the form). The following is the relevant code form the view: <div class="control-group"> <label class="control-label" for="InAppPurchase">Does your app include In App Purchase?</label> <div class="controls"> @Html.CheckBoxFor(o => o.InAppPurchase) @Html.LabelFor(o => o.InAppPurchase, "Yes") </div> </div> <div class="control-group" id="InAppPurchasePromotionalPriceDiv" @(Model.InAppPurchase == true ? Html.Raw("style='display: block;'") : Html.Raw("style='display: none;'"))> <label class="control-label" for="InAppPurchasePromotionalPrice">App Friday Promotional Price for In App Purchase: </label> <div class="controls"> @Html.TextBoxFor(o => o.InAppPurchasePromotionalPrice, new { title = "This should be at the lowest price tier of free or $.99, just for your App Friday date." }) <span class="help-inline"> @Html.ValidationMessageFor(o => o.InAppPurchasePromotionalPrice) </span> </div> </div> This code works perfectly but when i submit the form a full post is requested on the server in order to display the message. So i created JavaScript code to enable client-side validation: requiredif.js (function ($) { $.validator.addMethod('requiredif', function (value, element, params) { /*var inAppPurchase = $('#InAppPurchase').is(':checked'); if (inAppPurchase) { return true; } return false;*/ var isChecked = $(param).is(':checked'); if (isChecked) { return false; } return true; }, ''); $.validator.unobtrusive.adapters.add('requiredif', ['param'], function (options) { options.rules["requiredif"] = '#' + options.params.param; options.messages['requiredif'] = options.message; }); })(jQuery); This is the proposed way in msdn and tutorials i have found Of course i have also inserted the needed scripts in the form: jquery.unobtrusive-ajax.min.js jquery.validate.min.js jquery.validate.unobtrusive.min.js requiredif.js BUT...client side validation still does not work. So could you please help me find what am i missing? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Validate a single property with the Fluent Validation Library for .Net

    - by Blegger
    Can you validate just a single property with the Fluent Validation Library, and if so how? I thought this discussion thread from January of 2009 showed me how to do it via the following syntax: validator.Validate(new Person(), x => x.Surname); Unfortunately it doesn't appear this works in the current version of the library. One other thing that led me to believe that validating a single property might be possible is the following quote from Jeremy Skinners' blog post: "Finally, I added the ability to be able to execute some of FluentValidation’s Property Validators without needing to validate the entire object. This means it is now possible to stop the default “A value was required” message from being added to ModelState. " However I do not know if that necessarily means it supports just validating a single property or the fact that you can tell the validation library to stop validating after the first validation error.

    Read the article

  • How to disable JSR-303 Hibernate Validation in Spring3

    - by Pinchy
    After putting hibernate-validator.jar and javax.validation-api.jar in my classpath the org.springframework.dao.DataIntegrityViolationException is replaced by org.hibernate.exception.ConstraintViolationException and this is causing a lot of issues. I have to put this two jars to be able to upgrade Jersey to 2.4, it has dependency on these two jars. Putting these properties into hibernate.properties file doesn't help, hibernate simply ignores them but it loads the properties on start-up loaded properties from resource hibernate.properties: {hibernate.validator.apply_to_ddl=false,hibernate.validator.autoregister_listeners=false etc} javax.persistence.validation.mode=none hibernate.validator.autoregister_listeners=false hibernate.validator.apply_to_ddl=false I am using Spring 3.2.4 with SessionFactory and mapping resources from hbm.xml files with constraints in it, hibernate 3.6.9.final, hibernate-validator 5.0.final, javax.validator-api 1.1.0.Final I just can't figure out how to disable hibernate validation, any help will be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • xsd validation againts xsd generated class level validation

    - by Miral
    In my project I have very big XSD file which i use to validate some XML request and response to a 3rd party. For the above scenario I can have 2 approaches 1) Create XML and then validate against give XSD 2) Create classes from XSD with the help of XSD gen tool, add xtra bit of attirbutes and use them for validation. Validation in the second way will work somewhat in this manner, a) convert xml request/response into object with XML Serialization b) validate the object with custom attributes set on each property, i.e. Pass the object to a method which will validate the object by iterating through properties and its custom attributes set on the each property, and this will return a boolean value if the object validates and that determines whether the xml request is valid or not? Now the concern which approach is good in terms of performance and anything else???

    Read the article

  • Validation in asp.net MVC - validation only to happen when "asked"

    - by jeriley
    I've got a slightly different validation requirement than the usual "when save, validate!". The system can allow someone to update a bunch of times without being "bothered" with a validation listing UNTIL they say it's complete. I thought I might be able to pull a fast one and put the [HandleError] on the method of which this would fire, but that validates every save. Is there an attribte I can put into my custom validator that can handle this or am I going to have to write up my own HandleError attribute?

    Read the article

  • How to dynamically set validation messages on properties with a class validation attribute

    - by Dan
    I'm writing Validation attribute that sits on the class but inspects the properties of the class. I want it to set a validation message on each of the properties it finds to be invalid. How do I do this? This is what I have got so far: [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)] public class LinkedFieldValidationAttribute : ValidationAttribute { private readonly string[] _properiesToValidate; public LinkedFieldValidationAttribute(params string[] properiesToValidate) { _properiesToValidate = properiesToValidate; } public override bool IsValid(object value) { PropertyDescriptorCollection properties = TypeDescriptor.GetProperties(value); foreach (var propertyName in _properiesToValidate) { var propertyValue = properties.Find(propertyName, false).GetValue(value); //if value is invalid add message from base } //return validity } }

    Read the article

  • Constructor parameter validation in C# - Best practices

    - by MPelletier
    What is the best practice for constructor parameter validation? Suppose a simple bit of C#: public class MyClass { public MyClass(string text) { if (String.IsNullOrEmpty(text)) throw new ArgumentException("Text cannot be empty"); // continue with normal construction } } Would it be acceptable to throw an exception? The alternative I encountered was pre-validation, before instantiating: public class CallingClass { public MyClass MakeMyClass(string text) { if (String.IsNullOrEmpty(text)) { MessageBox.Show("Text cannot be empty"); return null; } else { return new MyClass(text); } } }

    Read the article

  • Validation Meta tag for Bing [closed]

    - by Yannis Dran
    Note of the author: I did my research before posting and the old "duplicate" generated over a year ago and things have changed since then. In addition, it was generic question but mine is targeting only ONE search engine machine: BING. FAQ is not clear about how should we deal with these, "duplicate" cases. The "duplicate" can be found here: Validation Meta tags for search engines Should I remove the validation meta tag for the Bing search engine after I validate the website?

    Read the article

  • Data Model Dissonance

    - by Tony Davis
    So often at the start of the development of database applications, there is a premature rush to the keyboard. Unless, before we get there, we’ve mapped out and agreed the three data models, the Conceptual, the Logical and the Physical, then the inevitable refactoring will dog development work. It pays to get the data models sorted out up-front, however ‘agile’ you profess to be. The hardest model to get right, the most misunderstood, and the one most neglected by the various modeling tools, is the conceptual data model, and yet it is critical to all that follows. The conceptual model distils what the business understands about itself, and the way it operates. It represents the business rules that govern the required data, its constraints and its properties. The conceptual model uses the terminology of the business and defines the most important entities and their inter-relationships. Don’t assume that the organization’s understanding of these business rules is consistent or accurate. Too often, one department has a subtly different understanding of what an entity means and what it stores, from another. If our conceptual data model fails to resolve such inconsistencies, it will reduce data quality. If we don’t collect and measure the raw data in a consistent way across the whole business, how can we hope to perform meaningful aggregation? The conceptual data model has more to do with business than technology, and as such, developers often regard it as a worthy but rather arcane ceremony like saluting the flag or only eating fish on Friday. However, the consequences of getting it wrong have a direct and painful impact on many aspects of the project. If you adopt a silo-based (a.k.a. Domain driven) approach to development), you are still likely to suffer by starting with an incomplete knowledge of the domain. Even when you have surmounted these problems so that the data entities accurately reflect the business domain that the application represents, there are likely to be dire consequences from abandoning the goal of a shared, enterprise-wide understanding of the business. In reading this, you may recall experiences of the consequence of getting the conceptual data model wrong. I believe that Phil Factor, for example, witnessed the abandonment of a multi-million dollar banking project due to an inadequate conceptual analysis of how the bank defined a ‘customer’. We’d love to hear of any examples you know of development projects poleaxed by errors in the conceptual data model. Cheers, Tony

    Read the article

  • Achieving decoupling in Model classes

    - by Guven
    I am trying to test-drive (or at least write unit tests) my Model classes but I noticed that my classes end up being too coupled. Since I can't break this coupling, writing unit tests is becoming harder and harder. To be more specific: Model Classes: These are the classes that hold the data in my application. They resemble pretty much the POJO (plain old Java objects), but they also have some methods. The application is not too big so I have around 15 model classes. Coupling: Just to give an example, think of a simple case of Order Header - Order Item. The header knows the item and the item knows the header (needs some information from the header for performing certain operations). Then, let's say there is the relationship between Order Item - Item Report. The item report needs the item as well. At this point, imagine writing tests for Item Report; you need have a Order Header to carry out the tests. This is a simple case with 3 classes; things get more complicated with more classes. I can come up with decoupled classes when I design algorithms, persistence layers, UI interactions, etc... but with model classes, I can't think of a way to separate them. They currently sit as one big chunk of classes that depend on each other. Here are some workarounds that I can think of: Data Generators: I have a package that generates sample data for my model classes. For example, the OrderHeaderGenerator class creates OrderHeaders with some basic data in it. I use the OrderHeaderGenerator from my ItemReport unit-tests so that I get an instance to OrderHeader class. The problem is these generators get complicated pretty fast and then I also need to test these generators; defeating the purpose a little bit. Interfaces instead of dependencies: I can come up with interfaces to get rid of the hard dependencies. For example, the OrderItem class would depend on the IOrderHeader interface. So, in my unit tests, I can easily mock the behaviour of an OrderHeader with a FakeOrderHeader class that implements the IOrderHeader interface. The problem with this approach is the complexity that the Model classes would end up having. Would you have other ideas on how to break this coupling in the model classes? Or, how to make it easier to unit-test the model classes?

    Read the article

  • javascript date validation

    - by Bharanikumar
    Assume in my text box user enter like 18-06-2010 , Validation RULE if date is greater then current date then program should through the validation error like , PELASE ENTER PAST OR CURRENT DATE, DONT CHOOSE FUTURE DATE , Thanks

    Read the article

  • Model binding & derived model classes

    - by Richard Ev
    Does ASP.NET MVC offer any simple way to get model binding to work when you have model classes that inherit from others? In my scenario I have a View that is strongly typed to List<Person>. I have a couple of classes that inherit from Person, namely PersonTypeOne and PersonTypeTwo. I have three strongly typed partial views with names that match these class names (and render form elements for the properties of their respective models). This means that in my main View I can have the following code: <% for(int i = 0; i < Model.Count; i++) { Html.RenderPartial(Model[i].GetType().Name, Model[i]); } %> This works well, apart from when the user submits the form the relevant controller action method just gets a List<Person>, rather than a list of Person, PersonTypeOne and PersonTypeTwo. This is pretty much as expected as the form submission doesn't contain enough information to tell the default model binder to create any instances of PersonTypeOne and PersonTypeTwo classes. So, is there any way to get such functionality from the default model binder?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >