CSC/ECE 517 Spring 2016/Mozilla Implement HTML5 form validation - Revision history

Vksuryad: /* Project Description */

2016-04-02T02:56:19Z

Project Description

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:56, 2 April 2016
Line 24:		Line 24:
	./mach run tests/html/about-mozilla.html		./mach run tests/html/about-mozilla.html

	* The next requirement was to uncomment the attributes in ValidityState.weidl and fix the resulting build errors by implementing appropriate stub methods in validitystate.rs		* The next requirement was to uncomment the attributes in ValidityState.weidl and fix the resulting build errors by implementing appropriate stub methods in validitystate.rs. This facilitates in declaring the methods which we will be using for validation
	[[File:Uncomment.png]]		[[File:Uncomment.png]]
	* Next, we had to modify the ValidityState constructor to take an &Element argument and store it as element variable of JS<Element> type member in the ValidityState.		* Next, we had to modify the ValidityState constructor to take an &Element argument and store it as element variable of JS<Element> type member in the ValidityState.
	[[File:vsconstructor.png]]		[[File:vsconstructor.png]]
	* The changes to the constructor resulted in build errors in following files		* The changes to the constructor resulted in build errors in following files as the constructor was referred to in these files

	htmlselectelement.rs		htmlselectelement.rs
Line 38:		Line 38:
	So, the constructors called in these files were modified to send the required extra parameter.		So, the constructors called in these files were modified to send the required extra parameter.
	[[File:constructor.png]]		[[File:constructor.png]]
	* Next, we had to add a new enum “ValidityStatus” in ValidityState having each possible validity check in ValidityState.		* Next, we had to add a new enum “ValidityStatus” in ValidityState having each possible validity check in ValidityState. This enum is used to specify the state in order to describe if there is a Value missing or if there is no error and the state is valid
	[[File:enum.png]]		[[File:enum.png]]
	* Next, we had to define a new trait Validatable having method “is_instance_validatable”. (which takes the new ValidityStatus enum as an argument.)		* Next, we had to define a new trait Validatable having method “is_instance_validatable”. (which takes the new ValidityStatus enum as an argument.)
Line 50:		Line 50:
	htmlanchorelement.rs		htmlanchorelement.rs

	* Then, we had to define method as_maybe_validatable in file “element.rs” which returns an &Validatable value if the element implements the newly defined trait.		* Then, we had to define method as_maybe_validatable in file “element.rs” which returns an &Validatable value if the element implements the newly defined trait. This is used to check if the element is infact validatable before performing further operations to check the form validations
	[[File:newMethod.png]]		[[File:newMethod.png]]
	* Finally, we added a new html file “form_html5_validations.html” to test the HTML5 validation for the mentioned conditions		* Finally, we added a new html file “form_html5_validations.html” to test the HTML5 validation for the mentioned conditions

Vksuryad: /* Design Patterns & OO Practices */

2016-04-02T02:52:54Z

Design Patterns & OO Practices

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:52, 2 April 2016
Line 55:		Line 55:

	=='''Design Patterns & OO Practices'''==		=='''Design Patterns & OO Practices'''==
	We were not supposed to modify the existing design apart from adding a new behaviour/ability for HTML Element. We attempted to follow good OO practices throughout development. Servo has it's own coding standards which are checked by running following command		We were not supposed to modify the existing design apart from adding a new behaviour/ability for HTML Element. We attempted to follow good OO practices throughout development. While using enums and also while defining new methods, we tried to follow the DRY principle in order to avoid repetition of code. Servo has it's own coding standards which are checked by running following command

	<code>		<code>
Line 61:		Line 61:
	</code>		</code>

	Issues reported by test are to be fixed before pull request can be generated. This ensures that developers would adhere to coding standards.		Issues reported by test are to be fixed before pull request can be generated. This ensures that developers would adhere to coding standards. We have fixed all the issues reported by tidy. Further design patterns will be used in the next phase of the project, where validation functions will be implemented.

	=='''Testing'''==		=='''Testing'''==

Vksuryad: /* Testing */

2016-04-02T02:50:30Z

Testing

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:50, 2 April 2016
Line 64:		Line 64:

	=='''Testing'''==		=='''Testing'''==
	As of now, front-end testing is not possible as this requirement will be completely implemented during subsequent phases. However unit testing can be done by running following command		As of now, front-end UI testing is not possible as this requirement will be completely implemented during subsequent phases. However unit testing can be done by running following command

	<code>		<code>

Vksuryad at 02:47, 2 April 2016

2016-04-02T02:47:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:47, 2 April 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	''' Implementation of HTML5 form validation in servo'''		''' Implementation of HTML5 form validation in servo'''

	Servo is a prototype web browser engine being developed by Mozilla and written in the Rust language. This project implements [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5 HTML5] validations for servo.		Servo is a prototype web browser engine being developed by Mozilla and written in the Rust language. This project implements [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5 HTML5] validations for servo. The validations are implemented via methods such as "valueMissing" which determine for different elements such a HTMLInput element etc. if it is ok to leave the input blank or if input is required. The code snippets given in this wiki explain how these methods are called in the HTML elements via different enums. The actual code to validate these inputs, will be implemented in the next phase of the project.

	=='''Introduction'''==		=='''Introduction'''==

Vksuryad: /* Testing */

2016-04-02T02:42:54Z

Testing

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:42, 2 April 2016
Line 70:		Line 70:
	</code>		</code>

	There were 11 tests which were failing earlier but now these tests are ~~pass~~.		There were 11 tests which were failing earlier but now these tests are passing. The expectation for these tests has been changed from FAIL to PASS. Further tests are only required for the next round where we will implement the methods for validation.

	=='''Pull Request'''==		=='''Pull Request'''==

Atyagi2 at 17:58, 24 March 2016

2016-03-24T17:58:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:58, 24 March 2016
Line 27:		Line 27:
	[[File:Uncomment.png]]		[[File:Uncomment.png]]
	* Next, we had to modify the ValidityState constructor to take an &Element argument and store it as element variable of JS<Element> type member in the ValidityState.		* Next, we had to modify the ValidityState constructor to take an &Element argument and store it as element variable of JS<Element> type member in the ValidityState.
	[[File:~~Uncomment~~.png]]		[[File:vsconstructor.png]]
	* The changes to the constructor resulted in build errors in following files		* The changes to the constructor resulted in build errors in following files

Atyagi2 at 17:57, 24 March 2016

2016-03-24T17:57:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:57, 24 March 2016
Line 27:		Line 27:
	[[File:Uncomment.png]]		[[File:Uncomment.png]]
	* Next, we had to modify the ValidityState constructor to take an &Element argument and store it as element variable of JS<Element> type member in the ValidityState.		* Next, we had to modify the ValidityState constructor to take an &Element argument and store it as element variable of JS<Element> type member in the ValidityState.
			[[File:Uncomment.png]]
	* The changes to the constructor resulted in build errors in following files		* The changes to the constructor resulted in build errors in following files

Line 36:		Line 37:

	So, the constructors called in these files were modified to send the required extra parameter.		So, the constructors called in these files were modified to send the required extra parameter.
			[[File:constructor.png]]
	* Next, we had to add a new enum “ValidityStatus” in ValidityState having each possible validity check in ValidityState.		* Next, we had to add a new enum “ValidityStatus” in ValidityState having each possible validity check in ValidityState.
			[[File:enum.png]]
	* Next, we had to define a new trait Validatable having method “is_instance_validatable”. (which takes the new ValidityStatus enum as an argument.)		* Next, we had to define a new trait Validatable having method “is_instance_validatable”. (which takes the new ValidityStatus enum as an argument.)
	* Next, we implemented this trait and the corresponding method in the following files		* Next, we implemented this trait and the corresponding method in the following files
Line 48:		Line 51:

	* Then, we had to define method as_maybe_validatable in file “element.rs” which returns an &Validatable value if the element implements the newly defined trait.		* Then, we had to define method as_maybe_validatable in file “element.rs” which returns an &Validatable value if the element implements the newly defined trait.
			[[File:newMethod.png]]
	* Finally, we added a new html file “form_html5_validations.html” to test the HTML5 validation for the mentioned conditions		* Finally, we added a new html file “form_html5_validations.html” to test the HTML5 validation for the mentioned conditions

Atyagi2 at 17:56, 24 March 2016

2016-03-24T17:56:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:56, 24 March 2016
Line 25:		Line 25:

	* The next requirement was to uncomment the attributes in ValidityState.weidl and fix the resulting build errors by implementing appropriate stub methods in validitystate.rs		* The next requirement was to uncomment the attributes in ValidityState.weidl and fix the resulting build errors by implementing appropriate stub methods in validitystate.rs
	[[File:Uncomment.~~jpg~~]]		[[File:Uncomment.png]]
	* Next, we had to modify the ValidityState constructor to take an &Element argument and store it as element variable of JS<Element> type member in the ValidityState.		* Next, we had to modify the ValidityState constructor to take an &Element argument and store it as element variable of JS<Element> type member in the ValidityState.
	* The changes to the constructor resulted in build errors in following files		* The changes to the constructor resulted in build errors in following files

Atyagi2 at 17:55, 24 March 2016

2016-03-24T17:55:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:55, 24 March 2016
Line 25:		Line 25:

	* The next requirement was to uncomment the attributes in ValidityState.weidl and fix the resulting build errors by implementing appropriate stub methods in validitystate.rs		* The next requirement was to uncomment the attributes in ValidityState.weidl and fix the resulting build errors by implementing appropriate stub methods in validitystate.rs
			[[File:Uncomment.jpg]]
	* Next, we had to modify the ValidityState constructor to take an &Element argument and store it as element variable of JS<Element> type member in the ValidityState.		* Next, we had to modify the ValidityState constructor to take an &Element argument and store it as element variable of JS<Element> type member in the ValidityState.
	* The changes to the constructor resulted in build errors in following files		* The changes to the constructor resulted in build errors in following files

Atyagi2 at 17:48, 24 March 2016

2016-03-24T17:48:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:48, 24 March 2016
Line 66:		Line 66:

	There were 11 tests which were failing earlier but now these tests are pass.		There were 11 tests which were failing earlier but now these tests are pass.

			=='''Pull Request'''==
			Pull request # [https://github.com/servo/servo/pull/10108 10108] was created for these changes. This pull request was accepted and closed by Mozilla team.

	=='''Conclusion'''==		=='''Conclusion'''==