Search Results

Search found 4236 results on 170 pages for 'validation'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 33/170 | < Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >

  • Client validate non-model bound checkbox while using MVC 2 jQuery Validation

    - by Justin Saraceno
    Have: Using ASP.NET MVC 2, DataAnnotationsModel based server validation, and client validation with jQuery. Anything in my model is validated perfectly on the client with jQuery based validation (jQuery.validate and MicrosoftMvcJQueryValidation.js). Need: Adding an additional HTML <input type="checkbox" id="terms" /> to my form. I need jQuery validation to require that this checkbox is checked AND somehow hook it in with whatever jQuery client script MVC is automagically controlling. Yes, I know it won't validate on the server side, but I don't need or want it to. Seems like it should be simple but I'm new to MVC, a total beginner at jQuery, and my searches have been coming up blank. Any help would be appreciated!

    Read the article

  • symfony validation problem

    - by fayer
    im testing symfony form validation. the problem is very simple. no matter what i put in the body text area and post it, i keep getting "Required" back. i dont know why. i just have one validation rule. here is the code: code what is wrong/how can i debug? thanks UPDATE: it has something to do with the binding in the controller. cause even if i delete the validation the form will still not be valid and it will be passed to the template but this time without the "Required". so it wont be valid no matter if ive got the validation or not. it has something to do with the embedForm() maybe? someone that has validated an embeded form?

    Read the article

  • Can JQuery.Validate plugin prevent submission of an Ajax form

    - by berko
    I am using the JQuery form plugin (http://malsup.com/jquery/form/) to handle the ajax submission of a form. I also have JQuery.Validate (http://docs.jquery.com/Plugins/Validation) plugged in for my client side validation. What I am seeing is that the validation fails when I expect it to however it does not stop the form from submitting. When I was using a traditional form (i.e. non-ajax) the validation failing prevented the form for submitting at all.... which is my desired behaviour. I know that the validation is hooked up correctly as the validation messages still appear after the ajax submit has happened. So what I am I missing that is preventing my desired behaviour? Sample code below.... <form id="searchForm" method="post" action="/User/GetDetails"> <input id="username" name="username" type="text" value="user.name" /> <input id="submit" name="submit" type="submit" value="Search" /> </form> <div id="detailsView"> </div> <script type="text/javascript"> var options = { target: '#detailsView' }; $('#searchForm').ajaxForm(options); $('#searchForm').validate({ rules: { username: {required:true}}, messages: { username: {required:"Username is a required field."}} }); </script>

    Read the article

  • Context Issue in ASP.NET MVC 3 Unobtrusive Ajax

    - by imran_ku07
        Introduction:          One of the coolest feature you can find in ASP.NET MVC 3 is Unobtrusive Ajax and Unobtrusive Client Validation which separates the javaScript behavior and functionality from the contents of a web page. If you are migrating your ASP.NET MVC 2 (or 1) application to ASP.NET MVC 3 and leveraging the Unobtrusive Ajax feature then you will find that the this context in the callback function is not the same as in ASP.NET MVC 2(or 1). In this article, I will show you the issue and a simple solution.       Description:           The easiest way to understand the issue is to start with an example. Create an ASP.NET MVC 3 application. Then add the following javascript file references inside your page,   <script src="@Url.Content("~/Scripts/MicrosoftAjax.js")" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="@Url.Content("~/Scripts/MicrosoftMvcAjax.js")" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="@Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery-1.4.4.min.js")" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="@Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery.unobtrusive-ajax.js")" type="text/javascript"></script>             Then add the following lines into your view,   @Ajax.ActionLink("About", "About", new AjaxOptions { OnSuccess = "Success" }) <script type="text/javascript"> function Success(data) { alert(this.innerHTML) } </script>              Next, disable Unobtrusive Ajax feature from web.config,   <add key="UnobtrusiveJavaScriptEnabled" value="false"/>              Then run your application and click the About link, you will see the alert window with "About" message on the screen. This shows that the this context in the callback function is the element which is clicked. Now, let's see what will happen when we leverage Unobtrusive Ajax feature. Now enable Unobtrusive Ajax feature from web.config,     <add key="UnobtrusiveJavaScriptEnabled" value="true"/>              Then run your application again and click the About link again, this time you will see the alert window with "undefined" message on the screen. This shows that the this context in the callback function is not the element which is clicked. Here, this context in the callback function is the Ajax settings object provided by jQuery. This may not be desirable because your callback function may need the this context as the element which triggers the Ajax request. The easiest way to make the this context as the element which triggers the Ajax request is to add this line in jquery.unobtrusive-ajax.js file just before $.ajax(options) line,   options.context = element;              Then run your application again and click the About link again, you will find that the this context in the callback function remains same whether you use Unobtrusive Ajax or not.       Summary:          In this article I showed you a breaking change and a simple workaround in ASP.NET MVC 3. If you are migrating your application from ASP.NET MVC 2(or 1) to ASP.NET MVC 3 and leveraging Unobtrusive Ajax feature then you need to consider this breaking change. Hopefully you will enjoy this article too.     SyntaxHighlighter.all()

    Read the article

  • Verfication vs validation again, does testing belong to verification? If so, which?

    - by user970696
    I have asked before and created a lot of controversy so I tried to collect some data and ask similar question again. E.g. V&V where all testing is only validation: http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/4-5-2005-68117.asp According to ISO 12207, testing is done in validation: •Prepare Test Requirements,Cases and Specifications •Conduct the Tests In verification, it mentiones. The code implements proper event sequence, consistent interfaces, correct data and control flow, completeness, appropriate allocation timing and sizing budgets, and error definition, isolation, and recovery. and The software components and units of each software item have been completely and correctly integrated into the software item Not sure how to verify without testing but it is not there as a technique. From IEEE: Verification: The process of evaluating software to determine whether the products of a given development phase satisfy the conditions imposed at the start of that phase. [IEEE-STD-610]. Validation: The process of evaluating software during or at the end of the development process to determine whether it satisfies specified requirements. [IEEE-STD-610] At the end of development phase? That would mean UAT.. So the question is, what testing (unit, integration, system, uat) will be considered verification or validation? I do not understand why some say dynamic verification is testing, while others that only validation. An example: I am testing an application. System requirements say there are two fields with max. lenght of 64 characters and Save button. Use case say: User will fill in first and last name and save. When checking the fields and Save button presence, I would say its verification. When I follow the use case, its validation. So its both together, done on the system as a whole.

    Read the article

  • How to have Excel data validation display different data in drop down than is actually validated

    - by Memitim
    How can I provide a user with a drop-down menu in a cell that displays the contents from one column but actually writes the value from a different column to the cell and validates against the values from that second column? I have a bit of code that very nearly does this (credit: DV0005 from the Contextures site): Private Sub Worksheet_Change(ByVal Target As range) On Error GoTo errHandler If Target.Cells.Count > 1 Then GoTo exitHandler If Target.Column = 10 Then If Target.Value = "" Then GoTo exitHandler Application.EnableEvents = False Target.Value = Worksheets("Measures").range("B1") _ .Offset(Application.WorksheetFunction _ .Match(Target.Value, Worksheets("Measures").range("Measures"), 0) - 1, 1) End If The drop-down displays the values from one column, for example Column B, but when selected actually writes the value on the same row from Column C to the cell. However, data validation is actually validating against Column B, so if I manually enter something from Column C in the cell and try to move to another cell, data validation throws an error.

    Read the article

  • Backbone.js Model validation fails to prevent Model from saving

    - by Benjen
    I have defined a validate method for a Backbone.js Model. The problem is that even if validation fails (i.e. the Model.validate method returns a value) the post/put request is still sent to the server. This contradicts what is explained in the Backbone.js documentation. I cannot understand what I am doing wrong. The following is the Model definition: /** * Model - Contact */ var Contact = Backbone.Model.extend({ urlRoot: '/contacts.json', idAttribute: '_id', defaults: function() { return { surname: '', given_name: '', org: '', phone: new Array(), email: new Array(), address: new Array({ street: '', district: '', city: '', country: '', postcode: '' }) }; } validate: function(attributes) { if (typeof attributes.validationDisabled === 'undefined') { var errors = new Array(); // Validate surname. if (_.isEmpty(attributes.surname) === true) { errors.push({ type: 'form', attribute: 'surname', message: 'Please enter a surname.' }); } // Validate emails. if (_.isEmpty(attributes.email) === false) { var emailRegex = /^[a-z0-9._%+-]+@[a-z0-9.-]+\.[a-z]{2,6}$/i; // Stores indexes of email values which fail validation. var emailIndex = new Array(); _.each(attributes.email, function(email, index) { if (emailRegex.test(email.value) === false) { emailIndex.push(index); } }); // Create error message. if (emailIndex.length > 0) { errors.push({ type: 'form', attribute: 'email', index: emailIndex, message: 'Please enter valid email address.' }); } } if (errors.length > 0) { console.log('Form validation failed.'); return errors; } } } }); Here is the View which calls the Model.save() method (see: method saveContact() below). Note that other methods belonging to this View have not been included below for reasons of brevity. /** * View - Edit contact form */ var EditContactFormView = Backbone.View.extend({ initialize: function() { _.bindAll(this, 'createDialog', 'formError', 'render', 'saveContact', 'updateContact'); // Add templates. this._editFormTemplate = _.template($('#edit-contact-form-tpl').html()); this._emailFieldTemplate = _.template($('#email-field-tpl').html()); this._phoneFieldTemplate = _.template($('#phone-field-tpl').html()); // Get URI of current page. this.currentPageUri = this.options.currentPageUri; // Create array to hold references to all subviews. this.subViews = new Array(); // Set options for new or existing contact. this.model = this.options.model; // Bind with Model validation error event. this.model.on('error', this.formError); this.render(); } /** * Deals with form validation errors */ formError: function(model, error) { console.log(error); }, saveContact: function(event) { var self = this; // Prevent submit event trigger from firing. event.preventDefault(); // Trigger form submit event. eventAggregator.trigger('submit:contactEditForm'); // Update model with form values. this.updateContact(); // Enable validation for Model. Done by unsetting validationDisabled // attribute. This setting was formerly applied to prevent validation // on Model.fetch() events. See this.model.validate(). this.model.unset('validationDisabled'); // Save contact to database. this.model.save(this.model.attributes, { success: function(model, response) { if (typeof response.flash !== 'undefined') { Messenger.trigger('new:messages', response.flash); } }, error: function(model, response) { console.log(response); throw error = new Error('Error occured while trying to save contact.'); } }, { wait: true }); }, /** * Extract form values and update Contact. */ updateContact: function() { this.model.set('surname', this.$('#surname-field').val()); this.model.set('given_name', this.$('#given-name-field').val()); this.model.set('org', this.$('#org-field').val()); // Extract address form values. var address = new Array({ street: this.$('input[name="street"]').val(), district: this.$('input[name="district"]').val(), city: this.$('input[name="city"]').val(), country: this.$('input[name="country"]').val(), postcode: this.$('input[name="postcode"]').val() }); this.model.set('address', address); } });

    Read the article

  • Forcing a transaction to rollback on validation errors in Seam

    - by Chris Williams
    Quick version: We're looking for a way to force a transaction to rollback when specific situations occur during the execution of a method on a backing bean but we'd like the rollback to happen without having to show the user a generic 500 error page. Instead, we'd like the user to see the form she just submitted and a FacesMessage that indicates what the problem was. Long version: We've got a few backing beans that use components to perform a few related operations in the database (using JPA/Hibernate). During the process, an error can occur after some of the database operations have happened. This could be for a few different reasons but for this question, let's assume there's been a validation error that is detected after some DB writes have happened that weren't detectible before the writes occurred. When this happens, we'd like to make sure all of the db changes up to this point will be rolled back. Seam can deal with this because if you throw a RuntimeException out of the current FacesRequest, Seam will rollback the current transaction. The problem with this is that the user is shown a generic error page. In our case, we'd actually like the user to be shown the page she was on with a descriptive message about what went wrong, and have the opportunity to correct the bad input that caused the problem. The solution we've come up with is to throw an Exception from the component that discovers the validation problem with the annotation: @ApplicationException( rollback = true ) Then our backing bean can catch this exception, assume the component that threw it has published the appropriate FacesMessage, and simply return null to take the user back to the input page with the error displayed. The ApplicationException annotation tells Seam to rollback the transaction and we're not showing the user a generic error page. This worked well for the first place we used it that happened to only be doing inserts. The second place we tried to use it, we have to delete something during the process. In this second case, everything works if there's no validation error. If a validation error does happen, the rollback Exception is thrown and the transaction is marked for rollback. Even if no database modifications have happened to be rolled back, when the user fixes the bad data and re-submits the page, we're getting: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Removing a detached instance The detached instance is lazily loaded from another object (there's a many to one relationship). That parent object is loaded when the backing bean is instantiated. Because the transaction was rolled back after the validation error, the object is now detached. Our next step was to change this page from conversation scope to page scope. When we did this, Seam can't even render the page after the validation error because our page has to hit the DB to render and the transaction has been marked for rollback. So my question is: how are other people dealing with handling errors cleanly and properly managing transactions at the same time? Better yet, I'd love to be able to use everything we have now if someone can spot something I'm doing wrong that would be relatively easy to fix. I've read the Seam Framework article on Unified error page and exception handling but this is geared more towards more generic errors your application might encounter.

    Read the article

  • jQuery validation plugin addMethod firing incorrectly

    - by LoganEtherton
    I must be missing something obvious, but everything that I've tried for this is leaving me empty handed, so I'm a bit puzzled. I'm attempting to use the jQuery validation plugin with custom validation methods, but it seems to be hit or miss. It seems that I am able to successfully add rules to a certain extent, but some of the methods are not applied. Or the specified method is not applied, and the incorrect method is instead applied. So, for example, this works without a hitch: $.validator.addMethod("emailValidation", function(value, element) { return /^((([a-z]|\d|[!#\$%&'\*\+\-\/=\?\^_`{\|}~]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])+(\.([a-z]|\d|[!#\$%&'\*\+\-\/=\?\^_`{\|}~]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])+)*)|((\x22)((((\x20|\x09)*(\x0d\x0a))?(\x20|\x09)+)?(([\x01-\x08\x0b\x0c\x0e-\x1f\x7f]|\x21|[\x23-\x5b]|[\x5d-\x7e]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])|(\\([\x01-\x09\x0b\x0c\x0d-\x7f]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF]))))*(((\x20|\x09)*(\x0d\x0a))?(\x20|\x09)+)?(\x22)))@((([a-z]|\d|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])|(([a-z]|\d|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])([a-z]|\d|-|\.|_|~|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])*([a-z]|\d|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])))\.)+(([a-z]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])|(([a-z]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])([a-z]|\d|-|\.|_|~|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])*([a-z]|[\u00A0-\uD7FF\uF900-\uFDCF\uFDF0-\uFFEF])))\.?$/.test(value); }, "Please enter a valid email address." ); $.validator.addMethod("password", function(value, element) { return /[^\s]{6,25}/.test(value); }, "Please enter a password between 6 and 25 characters long." ); ... $(function(){ $("#registrationForm").validate({ rules: { email: { required: true, emailValidation: true }, password: { required: true, password: true }, } }); }); Both the password validation and email validation work. But then I add, in the same exact manner, a validation test for names. So, right below where the password method ends, I add: $.validator.addMethod("name", function(value, element) { return /[^\s]{6,25}/.test(value); }, "Please enter a valid name." ); Which turns the validate call into: $(function(){ $("#registrationForm").validate({ rules: { email: { required: true, emailValidation: true }, password: { required: true, password: true }, studentFirstName: { name: true } } }); }); And suddenly, everything is only validating for names. Both the email and password fields now validate using the name method, as does the name field. This is confusing! I've added console.log calls to all methods, and indeed, it's not that one is being called after the other - the only one being called is name. I've checked and double checked that the element selection is good. I've checked that everything is groovy with the methods themselves. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Atom feed validator keeps showing Self reference doesn't match document location

    - by Dino
    I am creating an atom feed, but when I validate it I keep getting: Self reference doesn't match document location and the specific line that is causing the error is: <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.example.com/test.rss"/> Please can anyone advise what the error is? Ps. I noticed an up arrow just at the end of that line. (presumably something to do with that bbut not sure)

    Read the article

  • C# window application : How to validate mobile no.

    - by SAMIR BHOGAYTA
    //First : Simple Method private void textBox1_KeyPress(object sender, KeyPressEventArgs e) { if (char.IsDigit(e.KeyChar) == true) { if (textBox1.Text.Length 10) { MessageBox.Show("Invalid Indian Mobile Number !!"); txtPhone.Focus(); } } //With the help of JavaScript function phone_validate(phone) { var phoneReg = ^((\+)?(\d{2}[-]))?(\d{10}){1}?$; if(phoneReg.test(phone) == false) { alert("Phone number is not yet valid."); } else { alert("You have entered a valid phone number!"); } }

    Read the article

  • Can I save & store a user's submission in a way that proves that the data has not been altered, and that the timestamp is accurate?

    - by jt0dd
    There are many situations where the validity of the timestamp attached to a certain post (submission of information) might be invaluable for the post owner's legal usage. I'm not looking for a service to achieve this, as requested in this great question, but rather a method for the achievement of such a service. For the legal (in most any law system) authentication of text content and its submission time, the owner of the content would need to prove: that the timestamp itself has not been altered and was accurate to begin with. that the text content linked to the timestamp had not been altered I'd like to know how to achieve this via programming (not a language-specific solution, but rather the methodology behind the solution). Can a timestamp be validated to being accurate to the time that the content was really submitted? Can data be stored in a form that it can be read, but not written to, in a proven way? In other words, can I save & store a user's submission in a way that proves that the data has not been altered, and that the timestamp is accurate? I can't think of any programming method that would make this possible, but I am not the most experienced programmer out there. Based on MidnightLightning's answer to the question I cited, this sort of thing is being done. Clarification: I'm looking for a method (hashing, encryption, etc) that would allow an average guy like me to achieve the desired effect through programming. I'm interested in this subject for the purpose of Defensive Publication. I'd like to learn a method that allows an every-day programmer to pick up his computer, write a program, pass information through it, and say: I created this text at this moment in time, and I can prove it. This means the information should be protected from the programmer who writes the code as well. Perhaps a 3rd party API would be required. I'm ok with that.

    Read the article

  • Why some consider static analysis a testing and some do not?

    - by user970696
    Preparing myself also to ISTQB certification, I found they call static analysis actually as a static testing, while some engineering book distinct between static analysis and testing, which is the dynamic activity. I tent to think that static analysis is not a testing in the true sense as it does not test, it checks/verifies. But sure I would love to hear opinion of the true experts here. Thank you

    Read the article

  • How should programmers handle email-username identity theft?

    - by Craige
    Background I recently signed up for an iTunes account, and found that somebody had fraudulently used MY email to register their iTunes account. Why Apple did not validate the email address, I will never know. Now I am told that I cannot use my email address to register a new iTunes account, as this email address is linked to an existing account. This got be thinking... Question How should we as developers handle email/identity theft? Obviously, we should verify that an email address belongs to the person it is said to belong to. Why Apple did not do this in my case, I have no idea. But lets pretend we use email address for login/account identification, and something slipped though the cracks (be it our end, or the users). How should we handle reports of fraudulent accounts?

    Read the article

  • Strengthening code with possibly useless exception handling

    - by rdurand
    Is it a good practice to implement useless exception handling, just in case another part of the code is not coded correctly? Basic example A simple one, so I don't loose everybody :). Let's say I'm writing an app that will display a person's information (name, address, etc.), the data being extracted from a database. Let's say I'm the one coding the UI part, and someone else is writing the DB query code. Now imagine that the specifications of your app say that if the person's information is incomplete (let's say, the name is missing in the database), the person coding the query should handle this by returning "NA" for the missing field. What if the query is poorly coded and doesn't handle this case? What if the guy who wrote the query handles you an incomplete result, and when you try to display the informations, everything crashes, because your code isn't prepared to display empty stuff? This example is very basic. I believe most of you will say "it's not your problem, you're not responsible for this crash". But, it's still your part of the code which is crashing. Another example Let's say now I'm the one writing the query. The specifications don't say the same as above, but that the guy writing the "insert" query should make sure all the fields are complete when adding a person to the database to avoid inserting incomplete information. Should I protect my "select" query to make sure I give the UI guy complete informations? The questions What if the specifications don't explicitly say "this guy is the one in charge of handling this situation"? What if a third person implements another query (similar to the first one, but on another DB) and uses your UI code to display it, but doesn't handle this case in his code? Should I do what's necessary to prevent a possible crash, even if I'm not the one supposed to handle the bad case? I'm not looking for an answer like "(s)he's the one responsible for the crash", as I'm not solving a conflict here, I'd like to know, should I protect my code against situations it's not my responsibility to handle? Here, a simple "if empty do something" would suffice. In general, this question tackles redundant exception handling. I'm asking it because when I work alone on a project, I may code 2-3 times a similar exception handling in successive functions, "just in case" I did something wrong and let a bad case come through.

    Read the article

  • Methods to Validate User Supplied Data

    - by clifgray
    I am working on a website where users record data from certain locations and they input an address to tag that location with a GPS coordinate. Pretty frequently those locations are tagged more than a mile away from the actual location and I am trying to implement a few ways to validate the data. Right now I am thinkiing of: having a tag of location pages for other users to say "incorrect location" so I can go one by one and fix it letting users with a decent amount of experience (reputation) edit the location GPS coordinates making the location be validated by a mod before it goes live and they make sure it is a good location Are these reasonable? I know the first will take a lot of my time and I would love some suggestions.

    Read the article

  • How should programmers handle identity theft?

    - by Craige
    I recently signed up for an iTunes account, and found that somebody had fraudulently used MY email to register their iTunes account. Why Apple did not validate the email address, I will never know. Now I am told that I cannot use my email address to register a new iTunes account, as this email address is linked to an existing account. This got me thinking, as developers, database administrators, technical analysts, and everything in between, how should we handle reports of a fraud account? Experience teaches us never to re-assign identifying credentials. This can break things and/or cause mass confusion, especially in the realm of the web. That is, if we are are needing to reassign an identifying user credential we can very likely break a users bookmark by making a page render data that previously did not exist at that location. So if we have been taught not to re-assign details like these, how should we handle such a case where an account is discovered to be a fraud and the owner of the identity (e-mail or user name) wishes to claim this detail for their account?

    Read the article

  • Is an 'if password == XXXXXXX' enough for minimum security?

    - by Morgan Herlocker
    If I create a login for an app that has middle to low security risk (in other words, its not a banking app or anything), is it acceptable for me to verify a password entered by the user by just saying something like: if(enteredPassword == verifiedPassword) SendToRestrictedArea(); else DisplayPasswordUnknownMessage(); It seems to easy to be effective, but I certainly would not mind if that was all that was required. Is a simple check on username/password combo enough? Update: The particular project happens to be a web service, the verification is entirely server side, and it is not open-source. Does the domain change how you would deal with this?

    Read the article

  • OpenGraph tags and HTML5 validity

    - by netmano
    I have a HTML5 based page, and I inculded the OpenGraph tags according to it's documentation. Also I checked with Facebook Debug, and it can parse the metadata. But when I use W3C Validator, it reports the OG tags as error: Attribute content not allowed on element meta at this point. <meta property="fb:admins" content="...." /> Attribute content not allowed on element meta at this point. <meta property="og:url" content="http://www...."> They are all in the <head>. I would need my page be "valid" HTML5 and OG tags, as well. Could you help me giving a hint how can it be achieved? UPDATE: The name version also invalid: <meta name='fb:admins' content=''>

    Read the article

  • Validating User Stories: How much change is too much?

    - by David Kaczynski
    While the core of requirements development and acceptance criteria would ideally take place during the planning meeting in order to create a better estimate, Scrum encourages continuous interaction with the product owner throughout the sprint to validate and refine user stories. What kind of criteria is used to judge if there is too much change being imposed on a user story mid-sprint? When is it appropriate to change the requirements of the user story? When is it appropriate to cancel the user story / sprint in order to re-evaluate and re-estimate a user story in question?

    Read the article

  • Sanity checks vs file sizes

    - by Richard Fabian
    In your game assets do you make room for explicit sanity checks, or do you have some generally expected bounds which you assert? I've been thinking about how we compress data and thought that it's much better to have the former, and less of the latter. If your data can exceed your normal valid ranges, but if it does it's an error, then surely that implies you're not compressing the data well enough? What do you do to find out if your data is compressed as far as it can be, and what do you use to ensure your data isn't corrupted and ensure it's an official release? EDIT I'm not interested in sanity checking the file size, but instead, how you manage your sanity checks and whether you arrange the excess size caused by the opportunity to do sanity checks by using explicit extra data, or through allowing the data enough file space (data member size) to be out of valid range and thus able to be checked merely by looking at the asset in memory after loading.

    Read the article

  • Simple Architecture Verification

    - by Jean Carlos Suárez Marranzini
    I just made an architecture for an application with the function of scoring, saving and loading tennis games. The architecture has 2 kinds of elements: components & layers. Components: Standalone elements that can be consumed by other components or by layers. They might also consume functionality from the model/bottom layer. Layers: Software components whose functionality rests on previous layers (except for the model layer). -Layers: -Models: Data and it's behavior. -Controllers: A layer that allows interaction between the views and the models. -Views: The presentation layer for interacting with the user. -Components: -Persistence: Makes sure the game data can be stored away for later retrieval. -Time Machine: Records changes in the game through time so it's possible to navigate the game back and forth. -Settings: Contains the settings that determine how some of the game logic will apply. -Game Engine: Contains all the game logic, which it applies to the game data to determine the path the game should take. This is an image of the architecture (I don't have enough rep to post images): http://i49.tinypic.com/35lt5a9.png The requierements which this architecture should satisfy are the following: Save & load games. Move through game history and see how the scoreboard changes as the game evolves. Tie-breaks must be properly managed. Games must be classified by hit-type. Every point can be modified. Match name and player names must be stored. Game logic must be configurable by the user. I would really appreciate any kind of advice or comments on this architecture. To see if it is well built and makes sense as a whole. I took the idea from this link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model%E2%80%93view%E2%80%93controller

    Read the article

  • PHP W3 Validator API, Is this good? [closed]

    - by Josh Purcell
    I was trying to find a way to see if my site's code was valid or not but I continuously going over to W3 Validator so I decided to make an "API" however it really isn't! I just wanted to know if anybody can find a better solution to the one I have made. This is what I currently use, with the usage of ?uri=http://www.mydomain.com : <?php if(!$_GET['uri']) { echo "No URI!"; } else { $CheckURI = "http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=".$_GET['uri']; $URL = file_get_contents($CheckURI); $Start = strpos($URL, "<title>") + 7; $End = strpos($URL, "</title>"); $Title = substr($URL, $Start, $End-$Start); if(preg_match('[Invalid]',$Title)) { //Code is INVALID echo "<a href='$CheckURI' title='This is not good!' target='_BLANK'>INVALID Source</a>"; } elseif(preg_match('[Valid]',$Title)) { //Code is VALID echo "<a href='$CheckURI' title='Check It Yourself!' target='_BLANK'>Valid Source</a>"; } else { //It Went WRONG echo ""; } }

    Read the article

  • asp.net web apps: are OnServerValidate necessary with custom validators

    - by peroija
    I recently created a .net web app that used over 200 custom validators on one page. I wrote code for both ClientValidationFunction and OnServerValidate which results in a ton of repetitive code. My sql statements are parameterized, I have functions that pull data from input fields and validates them before passing to the sql statements or stored procedures. And the javascript validates the fields before the page submits. So essentially the data is clean and valid before it even hits the OnServerValidate and clean after it anyways due to the aforementioned steps. This makes me question, is OnServerValidate really needed when I validate on the clientside?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >