Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Validation and actions for View Settings #2159

Open
doekenorg opened this issue Oct 1, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Validation and actions for View Settings #2159

doekenorg opened this issue Oct 1, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@doekenorg
Copy link
Contributor

doekenorg commented Oct 1, 2024

Currently, the view settings do not have a validation system in place. This means the values can be basically anything, or be omitted. To have more fine grain control over the inputs, we'd need validation.

Describe the solution you'd like

  • Every settings should at least be able to be: required.
  • It should have a validate key which supports a callback, that receives the posted value, and the rest of the settings. Basically how Gravity Forms itself handles it.
  • Fields should also be able to have front-end validation; but this is secondary if the backend works well enough.
  • Validation should also work when changing the form
  • An action key could be added with incremental options for the future, but at least have: clear_on_form_change for example.

This solution is just whats off the top of my head, it might be better solved.

@GravityKit GravityKit deleted a comment Oct 25, 2024
zackkatz added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 7, 2024
This takes advantage of browser validation (related to #2159), while making a very small change.

I considered updating the `GravityView_FieldType` abstract class to add an `input_type` and just use the existing `GravityView_FieldType_text` class, but I determined that this was cleaner.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants
@doekenorg and others