Hi gerhard
I will take look at this next week.
I am aware that there are the possibility to define an own messageresolver but
an custom one would do the same the only difference would be where to get
resources. If i were able to define the base path via annotation i would not
have the work to do that by myself.
The thing with the convention would be fine if it would be possible to define
the behavior at interpreting the method name as property key. We do have a lots
of message with the syntax MY_KEY. But the method name should be getMyKey();
This leads me to another question is it possible to acess the implementation of
the interface via EL in the view?
We do have an message bean which provides the messages. It is application
scoped cdi bean.
We thougt we could extract an interface an use the created implementation in
the view. I must admit i do not know how the implementation of the interface
gets created within the i18N module.
Is this possible? Or do we have to wrap it with injecting in an message bean?
Send via Samsung Galaxy S2
-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] I18N MessageTemplate
Von: Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>
An: [email protected]
CC:
--- Begin Message ---
hi thomas,
please have a look at the optional @MessageContextConfig annotation.
after we have the basic parts, we could add e.g. the spi provided by
myfaces codi to support el expressions in messages.
regards,
gerhard
2012/7/5 Thomas Herzog <[email protected]>
> Thomas Herzog <[email protected]> hat geschrieben:@All
> Wouldn't it be fine to use convention over configuration within i18n
> module at property keys definition via @MessageTemplate?
> I read the user doc and it did not mention it.
> Also the oportunity to define a alternativ property file location would be
> fine, and to define the supported locales.
>
> // As in cal10n, Different location for properties file.
> @Base("META-INF/messages")
> // As cal10n, supported locales, shall be evaluated, if files are present.
> @Locales({@Locale("de_DE"), @Locale("en_US")})
> class MessageHolder () {
>
> // Would resolve to property key: MY_KEY
> Strin getMyKey();
> String myKey();
>
> // Overwrites convention
> @MessageTemplate("ERROR_USER_WRONG")
> String getErrorForWrongUserDetected()
> }
>
> Would you aggree?
> Is that already possible to define different location of the properties
> file and that method names get resolved to property keys without annotation?
> One question more, is it possible to access the implementation of the
> message resource via EL within the view?
>
>
--- End Message ---
