Re: Validation class comments

On 28 May 2002 20:55:34 +0200 "Tomas V.V.Cox" <cox@idecnet.com> wrote: > I'm talking about performance not easy of use :-) As usual, hard to make compromises between modularity and performances. Basically, the core validation should contain the following : Basic types : string email (optional MX check (calls network container) ) reserved words ( must have words[] ) regexp min length max length commonly used algos ( string algo stuffs like a std checksum with key incuded ) url's others ? numeric interval [min,max] precision (decimal) commonly used algos (luhn, ... ) And the 2nd level we would find :) : extended numeric : number localized ( "1'000'000.23","1 000 000.23", "1,000,000.23",...) currencies ("CHF 10'000,23") ( uses number localized and string) extended string : rarely used algos network DNS ( MX, www) others ? Complex types dates base ( std numeric "4/23/2002" "23.4.2002",...) extended dates ( ISO, human readable ) Nth Level XML: A way to define complex rules with a xml, something like powerforms rules definition. To control the validation flows (an item makes another mandatory,...). Maybe it will be usefull to get a convert tool used by Validate or any others pear modules. Validate may certainly be used to validate data from forms ( :) ), and certainly during an import csv file ( callback by file::csv b.e. ) or from a soap server to check client data. This will create the need of en/decode functionnalities. Anyway, we should start the core :). A lot of work has been done in QuickForm, OOH_Forms, SOAP, we can try to get back the code ? just ideas, pa