You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository was archived by the owner on Dec 14, 2018. It is now read-only.
A couple of potential ModelMetadata additions came up in offline conversations about #5676:
have ModelMetadata implement IModelMetadataProvider. This should significantly reduce the shenanigans we have around ensuring both ModelMetadata and its provider are available. E.g.
many contexts contain both ModelMetadata and IModelMetadataProvider properties.
ModelBinderFactory gets the provider from DI though ModelBinderFactoryContext contains a ModelMetadata property.
ExpressionMetadataProvider methods contain both ViewDataDictionary (which has ModelMetadata) and IModelMetadataProvider parameters.
add a ContainerMetadata property. This seem slightly redundant if ModelMetadata implements IModelMetadataProvider but would be convenient.
Note information about the containing property is not static and cannot be maintained in ModelMetadata.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
A couple of potential
ModelMetadata
additions came up in offline conversations about #5676:ModelMetadata
implementIModelMetadataProvider
. This should significantly reduce the shenanigans we have around ensuring bothModelMetadata
and its provider are available. E.g.ModelMetadata
andIModelMetadataProvider
properties.ModelBinderFactory
gets the provider from DI thoughModelBinderFactoryContext
contains aModelMetadata
property.ExpressionMetadataProvider
methods contain bothViewDataDictionary
(which hasModelMetadata
) andIModelMetadataProvider
parameters.ContainerMetadata
property. This seem slightly redundant ifModelMetadata
implementsIModelMetadataProvider
but would be convenient.ModelMetadata
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: