+1 Leo Simons wrote:
Hi all,
It will be beneficial to both container developers and container users
if identical functionality placed into the context can be found using
identical context key formats.
It will also be beneficial to have namespace separation in the context
keys to avoid clashes where the functionality is not the same but the
context key is.
This was discussed back in august, and recently brought up again. Noel
suggested we adopt the IETF standard RFC 2141 by reference. I think it
is a good idea and I've seen no evidence other people don't.
Therefore, I propose we incorporate RFC 2141 by reference as the
preferred way of formatting context keys.
here's my +1.
If no-one objects, I will add a documentation snippet to the coding
standards and find or write a utility class for making it easy to
properly parse RFC 2141-formatted strings (probably
org.apache.avalon.framework.context.ContextUtil).
Comments
--------
First of, I said "preferred way". I don't think there is a need to make
it a requirement that context keys are formatted this way; that would
also cause backward compatibility problems.
RFC 2141 is a specification of the format of URNs, universal resource
identifiers. A urn consists of a case insensitive prefix, "urn:",
followed by a case-insensitive alphanumeric namespace (domain) part, a
":", and then an opaque key which can contain most characters (I believe
? # and one or two others are excempt). Refer to
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2141.txt for details. Example keys could be
urn:avalon-info:work.directory
urn:avalon-merlin:blahaahaahat
urn:avalon-brazil:current.time
urn:avalon-phoenix:home.directory
cheers,
- Leo Simons
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-- Stephen J. McConnell OSM SARL digital products for a global economy mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.osm.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
