{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/JeremySkinner/FluentValidation/issues/321","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/JeremySkinner/FluentValidation","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/JeremySkinner/FluentValidation/issues/321/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/JeremySkinner/FluentValidation/issues/321/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/JeremySkinner/FluentValidation/issues/321/events","html_url":"https://github.com/JeremySkinner/FluentValidation/issues/321","id":175273780,"number":321,"title":"[Question] Example of 'plausible' validation?","user":{"login":"HydroBeaver","id":10036763,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/10036763?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/HydroBeaver","html_url":"https://github.com/HydroBeaver","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HydroBeaver/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HydroBeaver/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HydroBeaver/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HydroBeaver/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HydroBeaver/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HydroBeaver/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HydroBeaver/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HydroBeaver/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HydroBeaver/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2016-09-06T15:14:03Z","updated_at":"2016-09-06T15:14:03Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Hi!\r\n\r\nI currently have a project that implements FluentValidation to prevent invalid product configurations. The way we have it implemented is a strict validation where a certain set of parameters is either valid or not. However, for many of our products, we have setting combinations that are technically feasible (valid), but are typically not correct for the given application. \r\n\r\nIs there way of implementing a middle ground, what I'm calling 'plausible validation'? The experience would be that a user submits a configuration and rather than not being allowed to continue because it isn't valid, they get a warning that indicates 'while this is technically valid, it's likely not what you're trying to achieve.' I'm not sure if this is something that exists natively within FluentValidation or if it is something that can easily be extended. If you have an example of something like this, it would be a huge help!"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"HydroBeaver"}}