Ticket #2908 created and patch attached. Let me know if I should change anything.
On May 19, 1:57 pm, "Jörn Zaefferer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just use "messages" for embedding messages as metadata. The odds of > adding a method "messages" are extremely low, and once its released, > I'll update the docs accordingly. > > Jörn > > On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Dane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > -> "Avoiding the conflict between a method "messages" and those actual > > messages should be easy enough. " > > > Should we plan on supporting a simulatanious "message" method and > > custom messages in metadata? > > > As stated, I'm still climbing the learning curve :). Before I > > implement this I just want to make sure your not envisioning a better > > way. The strait forward check I'm planning on is to see if validator > > has any "message" methods defined, if it does it will treat "messages" > > in meta as a rule method, else it will treat it as a custom message > > object. This check, however, means a dev can't simultaneously have a > > method named "message" and still use custom messages in metadata. A > > minor, but strange requirement. Is this ok? > > > I was trying to figure out a way to compare the message object in meta > > to the "message" rule signature. If the method sig matches it will be > > treated as rule metadata, else custom message metadata. Don't know if > > we can guarantee repeatable results with that since rule method sigs > > can match the custom message object in rare cases. Leaving us with an > > even more rare, but stranger requirement. > > > I'm probably missing something so i figured I'd just ask what you had > > in mind that was "easy enough". > > > Thanks > > > On May 16, 9:33 am, Dane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Ah, agreed. I'll make these changes and send in a ticket. > > >> On May 15, 4:20 pm, "Jörn Zaefferer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: > > >> > How about this? > > >> > meta: default > >> > class="{required:true,minlength:2,messages:{required:'Enter > >> > this!',minlength:'Way to short'}}" > > >> > meta: "validation" > >> > class="{validation:{required:true,minlength:2,messages:{required:'Enter > >> > this!',minlength:'Way to short'}}}" > > >> > No need to change the meta-option that way. The code reading the > >> > messages just checks for a messages-property within the metadata. > >> > Avoiding the conflict between a method "messages" and those actual > >> > messages should be easy enough. > > >> > Contributions are welcome in any format, a ticket on dev.jquery.com > >> > with a diff attached is the preferred way. > > >> > Jörn > > >> > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Dane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > Ok I have a first cut done. elements can now have metadata like: > >> > > <input id="cname" name="name" class="{rules:{required:true,minlength: > >> > > 2}, messages:{required:'Enter this!', minlength:'Way to short!'}}" /> > > >> > > Quick question though. Which do you prefer? > > >> > > 1)$("#Form").validate({meta:"rules", metaMessages:"messages"}); > >> > > 2)$("#Form").validate({meta:{rules:"rules", messages:"messages"}}); > > >> > > I like 2, but it changes the existing API. > > >> > > How do you want the changes? > > >> > > On May 14, 1:04 pm, Dane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Thanks for the help on getting started. I'd already started wading > >> > >> through the source so you definitely saved me some time. I'm not > >> > >> totally comfortable with Jquery yet but I'm getting there :). I'll > >> > >> give this a go and see what happens. Should I just reply to this > >> > >> thread to contribute/ask questions? or is there a better way? > > >> > >> On May 14, 12:07 pm, "Jörn Zaefferer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >> wrote: > > >> > >> > It isn'T supported, yet. You could help getting it into the plugin > >> > >> > by > >> > >> > trying to implement it yourself, and contributing it back. > > >> > >> > To get started, take a look at the defaultMessage-method. Currently > >> > >> > it > >> > >> > looks for custom messages specified via options, then for the title > >> > >> > attribute, then for default messages. You can access metadata via > >> > >> > $(element).metadata(). > >> > >> > To be able to throw rules and messages together, you'd use the > >> > >> > meta-option to "namespace" rules, eg. > >> > >> > class="{rules:{required:true,email:true}, messages: {required:"yo", > >> > >> > email:"no"}", then $(...).validate({ meta: "rules" }) > > >> > >> > Hope this helps to get started. > > >> > >> > Jörn > > >> > >> > On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Dane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > >> > > Hi, > > >> > >> > > I'm trying to build a web framework utilizing the great work > >> > >> > > thats > >> > >> > > already been done on the validation plugin. I'm trying to use > >> > >> > > metadata > >> > >> > > to specify my rules. I'm having a problem overriding the default > >> > >> > > messages for multiple rules via metadata. It appears as though I > >> > >> > > can > >> > >> > > only specify one generic message for all my rules on a given > >> > >> > > element > >> > >> > > using the title attribute. > > >> > >> > > Is there a way use metadata to override error messages that I'm > >> > >> > > overlooking? If not can this be added? Additionally, do we have > >> > >> > > to be > >> > >> > > restricted to using the title attribute? Could we use custom > >> > >> > > attributes? It seems like a common scenario and is supported by > >> > >> > > the > >> > >> > > validate(option) method. > > >> > >> > > Thanks for any direction/feedback on this! > > >> > >> > > Keep up the great work! > >> > >> >> Dane