1.0 update usage question

Commencez par l’exemple GuestAddressTest dans l’issue et examinez la configuration de ValidatorFactory ainsi que les champs de violation qu’il met en œuvre. Déterminez et documentez l’utilisation prise en charge dans 1.0 pour inspecter les détails des constraints et des champs, y compris les propriétés nullable et les chemins de descriptor ; l’exemple doit montrer clairement les assertions attendues.

I'm updating to the 1.0 version of protovalidate-java, and there's a breaking change in how I consume the violations that I'm confused by.

Given this sample message:

message GuesAAddress {
  optional string zip_code = 1 [
    (buf.validate.field).required = true,
    (buf.validate.field).string.len = 5
  ];
}

I guessed at the changes I needed to make to unit test this.

 package common.guest.v1
 
-import build.buf.protovalidate.Validator
+import build.buf.protovalidate.ValidatorFactory
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ import org.junit.jupiter.api.Test
 
 class GuestAddressTest {
 
-    private val validator = Validator()
+    private val validator = ValidatorFactory.newBuilder().build()
 
     @Test
     fun `validate guest address - field wrong length`() {
@@ -24,8 +24,8 @@ class GuestAddressTest {
 
         result.violations.size shouldBe 1
         assertSoftly(result.violations[0]) {
-            constraintId shouldBe "string.len"
-            fieldPath shouldBe "zip_code"
+            fieldValue?.descriptor?.fullName shouldBe "common.guest.v1.GuestAddress.zip_code"
+            ruleValue?.descriptor?.fullName shouldBe "buf.validate.StringRules.len"
         }
     }
 }

Is what I did the expected usage change, or is there a cleaner way to inspect the fields? Them being nullable felt odd, and the path to get to those fields was not obvious to me.

Appreciate it - thanks.