add number validation#520
Conversation
| "property": "$@{property}", | ||
| "value": "=@number" | ||
| "$kind": "Microsoft.IfCondition", | ||
| "condition":"or(and(dialogClass.schema.properties['@{property}'].minimum, less(@number, dialogClass.schema.properties['@{property}'].minimum)), and(dialogClass.schema.properties['@{property}'].maximum, greater(@number, dialogClass.schema.properties['@{property}'].maximum)))", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
dialogClass.schema.properties['@{property}'].minimum [](start = 32, length = 52)
I don't think you need this. Less with null should be false.
| "actions":[ | ||
| { | ||
| "$kind": "Microsoft.SendActivity", | ||
| "activity": "@{callNumberAlert()}" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
callNumberAlert [](start = 35, length = 15)
Hmmm. Seems like we might be missing something here--a way to say do the same prompt again. In what we have generated so far, prompts tend to be predicatable, i.e. we keep doing the same one until fulfilled. If though someone used a Random secondary selector the prompt would be different. We don't need to fix this here, but it is something to think about.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agree. After check/alert/validation/help, we should have a way to let the users retry.
| - Enter a number for @{name(property)} | ||
|
|
||
| # numberValidation(property, number) | ||
| - IF: @{dialogClass.schema.properties[property].minimum && less(number, dialogClass.schema.properties[property].minimum)} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
dialogClass.schema.properties[property].minimum [](start = 8, length = 48)
Do you need this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Tested, and removed.
No description provided.