1.0 update usage question

Comece pelo exemplo GuestAddressTest na issue e analise a configuração de ValidatorFactory e os campos de violation que ela exercita. Determine e documente o uso compatível com 1.0 para inspecionar detalhes de constraints e campos, incluindo as propriedades nullable e os caminhos de descriptor; o exemplo deve mostrar claramente as assertions esperadas.

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.