[MGNLUI-3040] Composite fields with validation do not display error messages for invalid input Created: 22/May/14  Updated: 15/Jul/14  Resolved: 15/Jul/14

Status: Closed
Project: Magnolia UI
Component/s: forms
Affects Version/s: 5.2.4
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Bug Priority: Neutral
Reporter: Richard Gange Assignee: Mikaël Geljić
Resolution: Obsolete Votes: 0
Labels: Support
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified

Attachments: PNG File composite-validation-525.png     XML File config.modules.standard-templating-kit.dialogs.generic.pages.tabMetaData.fields.composite.xml    
Issue Links:
causality
Template:
Acceptance criteria:
Empty
Task DoD:
[ ]* Doc/release notes changes? Comment present?
[ ]* Downstream builds green?
[ ]* Solution information and context easily available?
[ ]* Tests
[ ]* FixVersion filled and not yet released
[ ]  Architecture Decision Record (ADR)
Bug DoR:
[ ]* Steps to reproduce, expected, and actual results filled
[ ]* Affected version filled
Date of First Response:

 Description   

When using composite fields together with validation you lose error messages that users receive for invalid input.

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Set up a composite field in a dialog
  2. Configure the fields to have some kind of validation
  3. Open the dialog and enter invalid data into the composite field and observe that no error message is displayed and the field is cleared out

I have attached some configuration for a sample composite field with configured validation to this ticket.



 Comments   
Comment by Stefan Baur [ 08/Jul/14 ]

Hi
Any idea for which release this will be scheduled?

Cheers,
Stefan

Comment by Mikaël Geljić [ 14/Jul/14 ]

Hi guys,

I attached a screenshot of the current state of your example, as of Magnolia 5.2.5 (same in 5.3).

There were some substantial improvements to complex fields in Magnolia 5.2.5, so probably it helped make this situation a little bit better. In essence, the field values are not dropped, and we do see the validation message.

We can argue that none of the subfields is yet pointed out in particular, meanwhile could you please let us know whether it addresses your concerns, or if you have any pain point left with the current solution?

Kind regards,

Comment by Stefan Baur [ 15/Jul/14 ]

thats already looking great. can you attach the current config as an xml export to this ticket?
thx, stefan

Comment by Mikaël Geljić [ 15/Jul/14 ]

I used the exact same config as already attached to this ticket!

Comment by Stefan Baur [ 15/Jul/14 ]

okay, perfect!

Comment by Mikaël Geljić [ 15/Jul/14 ]

Okay, thank you for your swift feedback!

I'll close the ticket for now then, and will also mark SUPPORT-3613 as resolved. If you happen to meet more complex requirements that are not addressed here, feel free to reopen or file a new one.

Meanwhile we'll keep that in mind if/when we refine field validation at some point.

Cheers!

Generated at Mon Feb 12 09:02:38 CET 2024 using Jira 9.4.2#940002-sha1:46d1a51de284217efdcb32434eab47a99af2938b.