Users - XHTML Validation
Locked
 
|
Hello,
Since I installed HTML Validator Firefox extension, I have noticed that most pages generated by OFBiz (especially in ecommerce) do not pass XHTML validation. Most of these are warnings like input tags not being closed but some are hard errors. I believe XHTML validation is still desirable goal. While I put patches for 4 of them in Jira, there are just too many of them. Would it be a good idea to require all changes to the screens be checked for XHTML validation?
Regards, Vinay Agarwal
P.S. Firefox HTML Validator is extremely easy to use. It shows a green check, warning, or error sign on the page being displayed. Double clicking on that symbol pops up the page source and shows the warning and error areas. It can “fix” the errors but that needs to be manually moved to the original ftl. _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
|
|
This is something that certainly needs to be done, and unfortunately is not often done. I fixed a whole bunch of these a while back to get some of the main ecommerce pages "clean", but there was a lot even in ecommerce that I didn't review or fix, and a fair amount has changed and been added since then. On the other hand... if only sloppy HTML (ie that doesn't validate) was the only problem we had... would be great. The patches are appreciated, but like you said there are lots of them and it doesn't make any sense to have an individual patch for each little change, and certainly doesn't make sense to have an individual issue for each one. The proper way to handle it, for anyone who wants to get involved, would be to spend whatever time they can checking and fixing such things and then when done with whatever time you can spend, send a single patch in a single issue with all of the changes. -David Vinay Agarwal wrote: > Hello, > > > > Since I installed HTML Validator Firefox extension, I have noticed that > most pages generated by OFBiz (especially in ecommerce) do not pass > XHTML validation. Most of these are warnings like input tags not being > closed but some are hard errors. I believe XHTML validation is still > desirable goal. While I put patches for 4 of them in Jira, there are > just too many of them. Would it be a good idea to require all changes to > the screens be checked for XHTML validation? > > > > Regards, > > Vinay Agarwal > > > > P.S. Firefox HTML Validator is extremely easy to use. It shows a green > check, warning, or error sign on the page being displayed. Double > clicking on that symbol pops up the page source and shows the warning > and error areas. It can “fix” the errors but that needs to be manually > moved to the original ftl. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
Re: Users - XHTML Validation
|
|
Vinay, David,
as suggested by you, I've installed the HTML Validator extension and I've played a bit to fix the html code generated by widgets (there were very few errors and some warning in the generated html code); now the generated pages are all validated correctly (no warnings/no errors). David, could you please have a look at my patch? http://jira.undersunconsulting.com/browse/OFBIZ-791 If you'll commit it I'll then commit other small patches to fix misc html errors in the applications. Thanks Jacopo David E. Jones wrote: > This is something that certainly needs to be done, and unfortunately is not often done. I fixed a whole bunch of these a while back to get some of the main ecommerce pages "clean", but there was a lot even in ecommerce that I didn't review or fix, and a fair amount has changed and been added since then. On the other hand... if only sloppy HTML (ie that doesn't validate) was the only problem we had... would be great. > > The patches are appreciated, but like you said there are lots of them and it doesn't make any sense to have an individual patch for each little change, and certainly doesn't make sense to have an individual issue for each one. The proper way to handle it, for anyone who wants to get involved, would be to spend whatever time they can checking and fixing such things and then when done with whatever time you can spend, send a single patch in a single issue with all of the changes. > > -David > > > Vinay Agarwal wrote: >> Hello, >> >> >> >> Since I installed HTML Validator Firefox extension, I have noticed that >> most pages generated by OFBiz (especially in ecommerce) do not pass >> XHTML validation. Most of these are warnings like input tags not being >> closed but some are hard errors. I believe XHTML validation is still >> desirable goal. While I put patches for 4 of them in Jira, there are >> just too many of them. Would it be a good idea to require all changes to >> the screens be checked for XHTML validation? >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Vinay Agarwal >> >> >> >> P.S. Firefox HTML Validator is extremely easy to use. It shows a green >> check, warning, or error sign on the page being displayed. Double >> clicking on that symbol pops up the page source and shows the warning >> and error areas. It can “fix” the errors but that needs to be manually >> moved to the original ftl. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
|
|
Hi,
I have a requirement to insert a manual admin validation step into various entity updates and creates. There are a large number of entities involved in this process, so I don't want to implement something for each of them. I was thinking along the lines of storing updates/creates as runtime data and holding them there until the necessary admin could approve the action. Is this the way to go? Is there a better alternative? -- Kind Regards Andrew Sykes <[hidden email]> Sykes Development Ltd http://www.sykesdevelopment.com _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
|
|
Andrew, This is a tricky one... How many different entities are you needing to do this for? Also, could you offer any additional information on some of the contexts where this would be used? For example, is this for approvals? If so usually the best option is to just store the information and have some supplemental approval information that various things would look at to see what to do with the details, ie for process, reports, etc. -David -----Original Message----- >From: "Andrew Sykes"<[hidden email]> >Sent: 3/14/06 8:35:00 AM >To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion"<[hidden email]> >Subject: [OFBiz] Users - Workflow >Hi, > >I have a requirement to insert a manual admin validation step into >various entity updates and creates. > >There are a large number of entities involved in this process, so I >don't want to implement something for each of them. > >I was thinking along the lines of storing updates/creates as runtime >data and holding them there until the necessary admin could approve the >action. > >Is this the way to go? Is there a better alternative? >-- >Kind Regards >Andrew Sykes <[hidden email]> >Sykes Development Ltd >http://www.sykesdevelopment.com > > >_______________________________________________ >Users mailing list >[hidden email] >http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
|
|
In reply to this post by Andrew Sykes
I am faced with something along these lines.
Here is the approach I have started: The status change that would hold up a process sets up a workflow status with a link to the screen that would bring the UI up for the user to interact. That way the actual workflow keep simple. I am in the middle of implementing the first one. if your interested will let you know how it works out. David E. Jones sent the following on 3/19/06 8:15 PM: > Andrew, > > This is a tricky one... How many different entities are you needing to do this for? > > Also, could you offer any additional information on some of the contexts where this would be used? For example, is this for approvals? If so usually the best option is to just store the information and have some supplemental approval information that various things would look at to see what to do with the details, ie for process, reports, etc. > > -David > > > -----Original Message----- > >From: "Andrew Sykes"<[hidden email]> > >Sent: 3/14/06 8:35:00 AM > >To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion"<[hidden email]> > >Subject: [OFBiz] Users - Workflow > >Hi, > > > >I have a requirement to insert a manual admin validation step into > >various entity updates and creates. > > > >There are a large number of entities involved in this process, so I > >don't want to implement something for each of them. > > > >I was thinking along the lines of storing updates/creates as runtime > >data and holding them there until the necessary admin could approve the > >action. > > > >Is this the way to go? Is there a better alternative? > >-- > >Kind Regards > >Andrew Sykes <[hidden email]> > >Sykes Development Ltd > >http://www.sykesdevelopment.com > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Users mailing list > >[hidden email] > >http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
|
|
In reply to this post by Andrew Sykes
David,
Part of the problem is that I don't know how many entities are involved, nor does it seem likely that I will be able to predict in advance. It seems the client wants to attach approvals processes in a fairly random way to users belonging to various roles. I guess what I'm talking about is a permission that lies somewhere between Read and Write. Perhaps some arbitrary way of dealing with this scenario would be useful. I was thinking along the lines of inserting a SECA or something similar to intercept the data and then store it elsewhere until it was approved. Perhaps if the data could be associated with a screen definition the approver could just re-populate the form using the stored data and submit if approved. -- Kind Regards Andrew Sykes <[hidden email]> Sykes Development Ltd http://www.sykesdevelopment.com _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
|
|
In reply to this post by BJ Freeman
BJ,
Sorry, I just replied to David before reading this, it does look as if we're thinking along similar(ish) lines. It would be great to know how you get along with this. I may be able to help with this, but I won't have funding/time for around 3 months. I'm just in the planning stage just now. -- Kind Regards Andrew Sykes <[hidden email]> Sykes Development Ltd http://www.sykesdevelopment.com _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
|
|
not to worry Andrew.
this has been in planning for 3 months and I an now implementing it. this is funded, thought probably not to the level to get a lot of people involved. As a matter of fact I am coding some now. I am also working on putting my other work that is somewhat outside the norm either in jira for consideration and modification, or will put on my Sourceforge site. Andrew Sykes sent the following on 3/19/06 10:24 PM: > BJ, > > Sorry, I just replied to David before reading this, it does look as if > we're thinking along similar(ish) lines. > > It would be great to know how you get along with this. I may be able to > help with this, but I won't have funding/time for around 3 months. I'm > just in the planning stage just now. _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users |
«
Return to OFBiz - User
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |