Javadoc DynamicForm.setRequiredTitleSuffix() escaping

[Blama]

Hi Isomorphic,

DynamicForm.setRequiredTitleSuffix() have wrong javadoc with respect to escaping.
" :</b>" should most likely be " :</b>". This is also true for other related javdocs (search the page in the browser for "&". All these should most likely be just "&".

Best regards
Blama

[Blama]

Hi Isomorphic,

I just set

setRequiredTitleSuffix(" (*):</b>");

which resulted in a displayed " :</b>" in the UI as suffix. Is it possible that the markup is added anyway in a different way and that the real setRequiredTitleSuffix-default does not contain any markup, meaning the javadoc is wrong here from a business perspective and not just w.r.t. &amp;?

Best regards
Blama

[Isomorphic]

We'll look into the JavaDoc showing inappropriate escaped characters - thanks for bringing it to our attention.

On your follow up post, it sounds like you're saying that your specified requiredTitleSuffix is simply not showing up in your usage [you're seeing the default, not your version including a "(*)" string], right?

Can you show us a small test case to reproduce this - we're not aware of problems with this property.

Regards
Isomorphic Software

[Blama]

Hi Isomorphic,

On your follow up post, it sounds like you're saying that your specified requiredTitleSuffix is simply not showing up in your usage [you're seeing the default, not your version including a "(*)" string], right?

I made a small error c&p the details. I meant that the value is used as data - not as markup.

I used code from this testcase and added this line:

setRequiredTitleSuffix(" (*):</b>");

See the result in the screenshot.

Best regards
Blama

[Isomorphic]

Ah - yes - you shouldn't be escaping the HTML at all - simply entering &nbsp;(*)</b> should work. The issue is simply that the JavaDoc is inappropriately escaping things so showing you an incorrect approach in the default value.

[Blama]

Hi Isomorphic,

Ah - yes - you shouldn't be escaping the HTML at all - simply entering &nbsp;(*)</b> should work. The issue is simply that the JavaDoc is inappropriately escaping things so showing you an incorrect approach in the default value.

Ok, got it.
But even if the Javadoc were generated correctly - wouldn't the </b> be unnecessary? It seems required items are always bold - see the Firefox inspect element screenshot from the last post.

Best regards
Blama

[Isomorphic]

If you set requiredTitlePrefix to "" and requiredTitleSuffix to "" the title will not show up bold - the bolding of the text is achieved by those flags containing "<b>" and "</b>"

[Blama]

Hi Isomorphic,

you are right. In the screenshot the markup Firefox showed is "repaired". I only set requiredTitleSuffix not to include </b>, but as the requiredTitlePrefix was still at default, Firefox silently closed the tag.
So the only problem here is with the javadocs.

Best regards
Blama

[Blama]

Hi Isomorphic,

just to let you know, this is not changed in the docs, yet.

Best regards
Blama

[Isomorphic]

Yes - this is queued up to be resolved, but we have higher priority issues to look at first as this is purely a documentation fix, not a user-visible bug.

[Blama]

Hi Isomorphic,

this got changed in the meantime, thanks.

Best regards
Blama