On Oct 21, 2009, at 10:03 AM, Iceberg wrote: > It is a little bit surprising and happy to see these error_message > draw enough attention. :-) So is it time to also consider my proposal > more than one month before? > http://groups.google.com/group/web2py/browse_frm/thread/8cbe658406be595f > > That way, we don't even have to adjust the default error_message to > please everyone. Instead we provide a good way to customize the > error_message whenever wanted.
A side note. As I was reviewing the messages, it became clear to me (maybe I'm just slow) that they fall into two categories (maybe it's a continuum). Setting aside translation issues, some messages (like the new number-range and IS_LENGTH messages) don't really need overriding: the default messages are all you'll ever need. At the other extreme are the IS_EXPR and IS_MATCH messages, which both default to "invalid expression". This is totally unhelpful, and I don't see a practical way to do significantly better in the default case. A developer using these validators should really regard it as mandatory to override the error messages if they have any regard at all for the user--or else to provide enough context in the form itself to make the vague error message adequate. A special case is IS_STRONG. How would one apply translation to that? A final note: there was some talk about a kind of "lazy T()". Without really knowing what that would entail, it does seem like it'd be useful. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py-users" group. To post to this group, send email to web2py@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
