Domino Upgrade

VersionSupport end
5.0
6.0
6.5
7.0
Upgrade to 8.5x now!
(see the full Lotus lifcyle) To make your upgrade a success use the Upgrade Cheat Sheet. Contemplating to replace Notes? You have to read this!

Search

Reference

1. Learn XPages online
2. Communicate with IBMers and Lotus Experts using Sametime

About Me

I am the "IBM Collaboration & Productivity Advisor" for IBM Asia Pacific. I'm based in Singapore.
Reach out to me via:
Follow notessensei on Twitter
(posts)
Skype
Sametime
IBM
Facebook
LinkedIn
XING
Amazon Store
Amazon Kindle

Mobile tag

Twitter

Languages

Other languages on request.

Visitors

Useful Tools

Get Firefox
Use OpenDNS
The support for Windows XP is coming to an end and has . Time to consider an alternative to move on. sounds like a lot of time, but, like an object in a mirror, it is closer than you think.

« I love my MIO box | Main| Building extensible applications »

XPages and Validation

QuickImage In our XPages workshop we have a number of exercises that deal with validation. XPages allows you 4 different approaches when and how to validate (not counting the on-field-exit validation which is a very bad habit anyway - never validate on exit, just hint, that this will not submit):
XPagesValidation.png
When you look at applications you typically find validation code in the submit button or attached to the submit event (that would be the second from left). While that is wide spread it is not the best way to do that in XPages. Looking at the possibilities we have 2 discussions: server vs. client, validator vs. Button/Event code. You have to be clear about the execution sequence: when a validator fails the submission code isn't executed. If the client validation (by any means) fails no server validation takes place.
  • Client side validation has the clear advantage to give faster feedback, since no round-trip to the server is required. However it only can be used as a measure for user convenience since it can be canceled out using the appropriate tools (Firebug anyone) easily. Client side validation needs all information for the validation downloaded into the client. So you are limited to simple validations like required fields, consistency checks, data types etc. Anything that requires server information (e.g. Is there budget left, is this the right approver) better lives on the server side. Also currently the client side validation in XPages relies on a simple alert() to notify of validation failures and users are fast as lightning to click away prompts without reading them.
  • Server side validation requires a round trip to the server (full page or a ajax call), so it will take longer. On the server side you can rely on any resources or lookups to protect data integrity. Also server side validation is less prone to manipulation (you would need access to the server sources). In XPages you also have better UI capabilities.
In conclusion: Client side is for convenience, server side for the "real stuff".
  • Validation in code (a button, the submit event etc.) is a typical way validation is done. Being the prevalent way doesn't make it right <g>. You need to roll your own notification mechanism (like updating a label) and tend to tie your validation into the UI. Also when you remove a field the validation routine is likely to break. Last not least: you have a hard time documenting what gets validated and why. (You see where I'm going with that)
  • Validators are defined together with a field and open a series of posibilities. XPages offers 9 different validators.

    You can write JavaScript, regular expressions, check for data types or roll your very own. All you can do in a button/event code you can do in a validator. Since the validators themselves don't interact with the UI the designer can decide how to surface the messages without changes to the validation code. When you remove a field all its validation code goes with it, so maintenance gets much easier. Last not least: you can run an XSLT report against your XPages source and render a report that shows a field with all the defined validators, which makes documentation easier.
  • Form Validation are the @Formulas defined in your classic Notes form. They only fire when you have specified "Run form validation" as "On Save" or "Both". Typically you would use those when upgrading existing applications.
In conclusion: Validators are the way to go. Read more about it in the Domino Designer WIKI on IBM DeveloperWorks. One important aspect to consider when you start and mix the validation methods is the execution sequence: From left to right: the first validation that fails will stop the process. So if (2) fails (3) - (5) never get executed!

Comments

Gravatar Image1 - thanks
here are more
{ Link }


Gravatar Image2 - Excellent post on validation in XPages

Gravatar Image3 - Enlightening, Stephan. I felt that while the course covered how to perform each method well, it was less clear on why each should or shouldn't be used in any given place (ok, that may be due to my personal woes making me miss day 2)

By the way, isn't it Wednesday today?

Just about to write my first SnTT post...

Post A Comment

Please note: Comments without a valid and working eMail address will be removed. This is my site, so I decide what stays here and what goes.

:-D:-o:-p:-x:-(:-):-\:angry::cool::cry::emb::grin::huh::laugh::rolleyes:;-)

Disclaimer

This site is in no way affiliated, endorsed, sanctioned, supported, nor enlightened by Lotus Software nor IBM Corporation. I may be an employee, but the opinions, theories, facts, etc. presented here are my own and are in now way given in any official capacity. In short, these are my words and this is my site, not IBM's - and don't even begin to think otherwise. (Disclaimer shamelessly plugged from Rocky Oliver)
© 2003 - 2012 Stephan H. Wissel - all rights reserved as listed here: Creative Commons License
Unless otherwise labeled by its originating author, the content found on this site is made available under the terms of an Attribution/NonCommercial/ShareAlike Creative Commons License, with the exception that no rights are granted -- since they are not mine to grant -- in any logo, graphic design, trademarks or trade names of any type.