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

support validating responses in the UI #34

Open
yoon opened this issue Nov 9, 2009 · 12 comments
Open

support validating responses in the UI #34

yoon opened this issue Nov 9, 2009 · 12 comments

Comments

@yoon
Copy link
Member

yoon commented Nov 9, 2009

Surveyor's Validation model now determines whether or not an answer is_valid? per the criteria set out by the author of the survey. This functionality is not yet hooked into the views, and needs to be implemented in a style similar to Question and QuestionGroup Dependencies.

@yoon
Copy link
Member Author

yoon commented Mar 23, 2010

an additional guide on inline validation in web forms:
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/inline-validation-in-web-forms/

also, a nice reminder about what to do/what not to do in forms:
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/sensibleforms/

@yoon
Copy link
Member Author

yoon commented Jul 19, 2010

@Nataliya
Copy link
Contributor

For NCS need to verify the formats of various inputs. Ex :

FORMAT MUST BE AA # # # # # # #-UR##

@hoffmanc
Copy link

hoffmanc commented Jun 6, 2012

So, to be clear: there is no support for validation of answers? What about validation of a collection of answers (e.g., a_1 + a_2 + a_3 == 100)?

@yoon
Copy link
Member Author

yoon commented Jun 8, 2012

There is on the back end, but it doesn't appear in the UI yet. We don't have a syntax yet for the validation of a collection of answers. But there are dependencies that could work on a collection of answers.

@ghost ghost assigned yoon Oct 31, 2012
@yoon
Copy link
Member Author

yoon commented May 30, 2013

Moving validations to the client side would have the same effects as moving dependencies to the client side - a lack of awareness of responses outside of the current section. We should build consensus on how to implement this both in the short and longer terms.

@kumbafu
Copy link
Contributor

kumbafu commented Jun 5, 2013

I'm hesitant to add this to the core UI. Different people will want to handle invalid answers differently. I've had two separate requests/workflows from users on how to handle invalid questions. If we do implement in the core, it should be in a way that's easy to turn off or override.

@rsutphin
Copy link
Contributor

rsutphin commented Jun 6, 2013

I agree with @kumbafu — Surveyor should not enforce validations unless that enforcement can be customized/disabled. It should provide a mechanism that:

  • Allows defining validations for questions in the DSL
  • Allows for determining if a particular response is valid/invalid
  • Allows for determining the set of valid/invalid responses in a response set

It may also need to provide an extension point for displaying validation messages in the UI. I'm not quite sure how that would work; maybe one part would be including validation information in the AJAX HTTP response when a question response is submitted.

It may also be worthwhile to make the validation syntax in the DSL extensible so that applications can define their own sorts of validations.

I've had two separate requests/workflows from users on how to handle invalid questions.

@kumbafu, it would be helpful to have the parameters for those workflows to ensure that Surveyor's validation implementation would enable (and not obstruct) them.

@kumbafu
Copy link
Contributor

kumbafu commented Jun 7, 2013

The two workflows I've been asked for are:

  1. To be able to highlight invalid responses (but allow the form to be filled out/completed)
  2. Disallow completion of forms that have invalid responses.

@ghost ghost assigned pfriedman Jul 8, 2013
@yoon
Copy link
Member Author

yoon commented Jul 8, 2013

We will implement:

Client side: mandatory questions and data types (e.g. integer, date, string)
Server side: validations as defined in the DSL with rules and validation conditions

tparsnick pushed a commit to HeHStudy/surveyor that referenced this issue Mar 10, 2014
Added required if question is marked as mandatory
Also preliminary support for type checking (:float, :integer, :time)
Using jqueryvalidation.org for client side validation

NUBIC#34
@alepore
Copy link

alepore commented May 31, 2014

was this implemented?

@pfriedman
Copy link
Member

No issue #34 has not yet been implemented.

There is a branch[1] that was started which uses Jquery.validations[2][3]
and it works for the most basic scenarios[4].

However this was just a start and there are several other issues to
address before being anywhere near Œcomplete¹.

Hopefully I, or someone, can pick it up again soon.

Kind regards,
Paul

[1] https://github.com/NUBIC/surveyor/compare/34_support-validations
[2] http://bassistance.de/jquery-plugins/jquery-plugin-validation/
[3] http://docs.jquery.com/Plugins/Validation
[4]
https://github.com/NUBIC/surveyor/blob/37a5e9a68e4bdfde020a7e42c0b15299e8c9
9009/lib/assets/javascripts/surveyor/surveyor_validations.js

From: Alessandro Lepore notifications@github.com
Reply-To: NUBIC/surveyor
<reply+i-80881-b594b9a6c5e393df7fcf71d7ca4f482c24d04d05-34622@reply.github.
com>
Date: Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 6:34 AM
To: NUBIC/surveyor surveyor@noreply.github.com
Cc: Paul Friedman p-friedman@northwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [surveyor] support validating responses in the UI (#34)

was this implemented?

Reply to this email directly or
view it on GitHub
#34 (comment).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants