Comments on: Mootools FormValidator – How to use (Final Part)

By: Mario

Mario — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 20:39:11 +0000

Nice to hear that, thx!

By: Emilio

Emilio — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:06:56 +0000

very very useful! Thanks for your contribute! :)

By: Mario

Mario — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:38:27 +0000

Interesting – that should of course be possible with a small custom validator. Have a look at part #4 now.

By: Michael Warkentin

Michael Warkentin — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:26:30 +0000

Is there any way to specify a minLength IF the field is filled in?

Eg. I want an optional field, but if something’s entered there, it should be at least 5 characters.

By: Aaron Newton

Aaron Newton — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 19:44:12 +0000

Yeah. As an example of how to write your own validators it’s great stuff. All 3 tutorials are really informative. Keep it up.

By: Mario

Mario — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 19:21:34 +0000

Thanks for the comment.

You’re right: The solution is not optimal when it comes to server load (of course depending on traffic, database implementation and so on).

Same as the non-asynchronous request this is more a “and-this-can-also-be-done-tutorial” than a “best-practice-for-all-cases-tutorial” :)

By: Aaron Newton

Aaron Newton — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 19:06:56 +0000

This is great stuff, but I have one comment. Form.Validator validates inputs both on change and on submit, which means that the user is going to submit the form and you’ll have this synchronous hit to the server followed immediately by another hit (the form actually being submitted). If you wanted to avoid this you would have to do some extra leg work that I won’t try and cram into this comment. I think it’s actually a better solution to write this code on its own and not use Form.Validator for this particular use case. Add a change event to the username input and do your check, showing a hint when the name is taken, but don’t prevent submitting the form or anything. Let the back end handle that collision as normal.

The complexity of this pattern is the reason Form.Validator doesn’t ship with a built-in validator for this problem…

By: Mario

Mario — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 02:10:32 +0000

Good point. The W3C validator and HTML tidy at least do not complain.. I assume if the CSS-classes are listed first, it won’t make problems.
The mootools-documentation states it’s valid XHTML:
http://mootools.net/docs/more/Forms/Form.Validator#Form-Validator – see “Notes”

By: RB

RB — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 01:12:16 +0000

Are single quote characters valid for class attributes?
ex. class=”matchInput:’password’”
I know that : and . are technically allowed in ‘id’ attributes according to the w3c but still don’t behave well across all browsers so best to avoid.
I’m not sure of the validation rules for ‘class’ but it seems strange that a single quote would be a valid value.

By: Mario

Mario — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:52:58 +0000

Thanks! Fixed it (and added the version number).

By: Judd Kussrow

Judd Kussrow — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:47:43 +0000

My bad, you might want to mention what version of mootools-more you are using. Aaron changed it from 1.2.3 to 1.2.4 to use the dot.

By: Judd Kussrow

Judd Kussrow — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:36:33 +0000

Additionally, the class is called FormValidator not Form.Validator