Data validation: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
m Replaced "your". Please see MOS:YOU.
Different kinds of data validation: refpunct., simplify heading
Line 18:
For business applications, data validation can be defined through [[declarative programming|declarative]] [[data integrity]] rules, or [[imperative programming|procedure-based]] [[business rules]].<ref>[http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa291820(VS.71).aspx Data Validation, Data Integrity, Designing Distributed Applications with Visual Studio .NET]</ref> Data that does not conform to these rules will negatively affect business process execution. Therefore, data validation should start with business process definition and set of business rules within this process. Rules can be collected through the requirements capture exercise.<ref>Arkady Maydanchik (2007), "Data Quality Assessment", Technics Publications, LLC</ref>
 
==Different kinds of data validation==
In evaluating the basics of data validation, generalizations can be made regarding the different types of validation, according to the scope, complexity, and purpose of the various validation operations to be carried out.
 
Line 42:
Code and cross-reference validation includes tests for data type validation, combined with one or more operations to verify that the user-supplied data is consistent with one or more external rules, requirements, or validity constraints relevant to a particular organization, context or set of underlying assumptions. These additional validity constraints may involve cross-referencing supplied data with a known look-up table or directory information service such as [[LDAP]].
 
For example, an experienced user may enter a well-formed string that matches the specification for a valid e-mail address, as defined in RFC 5322 <ref>(sections 3.2.3 and 3.4.1) and RFC 5321 – with a more readable form given in the informational RFC 3696</ref><ref>Written by J. Klensin, the author of RFC 5321</ref><ref>and the [http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3696 associated errata]</ref> but that well-formed string might not actually correspond to a resolvable ___domain connected to an active e-mail account.
 
===Structured check===