Comments on: Really Easy Field Validation with Prototype

By: Daniel Skinner

Daniel Skinner — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:36:53 +0000

Nice!

Extensible and easy to use – thinking of integrating this into PEAR QuickForm since I don’t like the native Javascript implementation.

By: Catalinux

Catalinux — Wed, 02 May 2007 15:47:13 +0000

Hi,

I do not think that is scalable such form of doing validation, using name classes. I think it looks cleaner if we use such model.

[code]
var frm=new FormValidation();
frm.addValidtion('field1','isNumber','Is not a number');
frm.addValidation('field2','isNumber');
frm.addValidation('field3','isEmail');
frm.addValidation('field3','ajax:http://urlto.check.returns/true/or/fals','It has to be from qmail.com');
frm.setErrorBehavior('stopOnFirst');//stop after miss validate
//frm.setErrorBehavior('stopAtLast');
[/code]

Such model cand be used in PHP, Perl or smth else.
Do you know such library that uses Prototype? Otherwise I’ll do it

By: mike

mike — Fri, 15 Dec 2006 18:00:21 +0000

You can easy add server validation. Just add new rules like : ['validate-unique-email', 'Cet email est dÃ©jÃ utilisÃ©', function(v) { var laRequete = new Ajax.Request( 'checkEmail.php', { method: 'post', asynchronous: false, parameters: 'email='+v }); return laRequete.transport.responseText; }]

By: Jason

Jason — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 03:38:39 +0000

I think this is a bit misleading to call this ajax validation. You’re using ajax to show error messages, but there is actually no interaction with the server for the actual validation.

By: hebiryu

hebiryu — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 10:18:52 +0000

oh my god.. you save mylife !!

it’s very easy to use & modify.

very thanks Rob !!!!

By: pmouawad

pmouawad — Sun, 04 Jun 2006 15:38:05 +0000

It’s rather a great beginning, just few drawback:
- Id attribute becomes mandatory since you use it to add/remove the advice.
- No i18n of messages
- It would be great if validation rules could take arguments, format for date fields (I don’t know how to do it without adding custom attributes to HTML)
How about submitting your code to commons-validator ?
Thank you for this idea.

By: Prototype » Prototype Services

Prototype » Prototype Services — Thu, 25 May 2006 10:03:44 +0000

[...] Ajaxian Really Easy Field Validation with PrototypeAjaxian Really Easy Field Validation with Prototype. A possible AJAX form validation solution: Really Easy Field Validation with Prototype. Not quite there yet, but very close.http://ajaxian [...]

By: anant bhatia

anant bhatia — Wed, 24 May 2006 08:40:51 +0000

This was good and useful.. Thanks

By: Desarrollo Web

Desarrollo Web — Tue, 23 May 2006 01:11:20 +0000

Ajaxian Â» Really Easy Field Validation with Prototype

A possible AJAX form validation solution: “Really Easy” Field Validation with Prototype. Not quite there yet, but very close.http://ajaxian.com/archives/really-easy-field-validation-with-prototype...

By: Marco Lazzeri

Marco Lazzeri — Fri, 19 May 2006 12:14:42 +0000

Strass: you should have a look at the Scripaculous wiki. It’s both about the library itself and Prototype:

http://wiki.script.aculo.us/scriptaculous/show/Prototype

By: francisco

francisco — Fri, 12 May 2006 19:51:57 +0000

Xforms is the answer if you need validation. See spec, XForms can validate based on W3C schema. For a semi complete javascript XForms please see FormFaces at source forge.

By: Ajaxian Â» Really Easy Field Validation with Prototype - Matt Heerema : Web Design

Thu, 11 May 2006 03:14:56 +0000

[...] A possible AJAX form validation solution: “Really Easy” Field Validation with Prototype. Not quite there yet, but very close. [...]

By: Jimmy

Jimmy — Wed, 10 May 2006 18:24:38 +0000

Still kinda buggy. It works good in Firefox but in IE on the same form I only get the first error box showing up.

By: Jon

Jon — Wed, 10 May 2006 16:38:33 +0000

The default styles are not super great, but you can change them. It would be nice if the default error messages were prettier. Anyone volunteer a good design for the author to integrate?

By: Jason

Jason — Wed, 10 May 2006 13:38:03 +0000

Volkan, I totally agree with you. Things can get way out of hand when trying to handle all possible cases in your validation. I believe there is a difference between validation and business logic though. I always handle generic validation (username, password, dollar, float, char, etc) on the client side and business logic (“Salary should not be greater than 10K if the person is female, but if he is male there is no uplimit in salary plus he can add additional data to field x”) on the server side. For me, in my world, this has many advantages and keeps life simple (I am a developer/designer writing web applications for corporate clients).

I have been reading up on AJAX more and more and I am wondering if anyone has ever incorporated AJAX with this type of validation.

Anyway, I have to say I was not all that impressed with the demo. I found it quite hard on the eyes. Is it just me?

By: volkan ozcelik

volkan ozcelik — Wed, 10 May 2006 07:13:18 +0000

My common experience with form is that, the more sophisticated they are the more custom validation you will need none the less.

The problem arises when you need some combined validation.
“Salary should not be greater than 10K if the person is female, but if he is male there is no uplimit in salary plus he can add additional data to field x”

No I’m not discriminating males over females. But I guess you see what I mean. Form validation is an ever-growing monster. And when you aim to create a generic validator for all possible cases you end up with a truckload of garbage code in your library. Which possibly will grow ever more when you try to integrate a “yet another” business logic to it which you have not thought apriori.

(don’t get me wrong: I do not say scriptaculous is garbage. It is an excellent framework to make client-side coding easy and fun, and the Validator object demonstrated here does a good job.)

Though, the object is an excellent tool for “generic” forms (username, email, password type).

By: Andrew Tetlaw

Andrew Tetlaw — Wed, 10 May 2006 00:26:39 +0000

The optional effects hook is already on my list :)

By: Strass

Strass — Tue, 09 May 2006 22:57:07 +0000

BTW, is there a website trying to centralize all prototype or scriptaculous based libraries ?