On Mon, 2003-07-21 at 21:30, Stephen McConnell wrote:

> I'm not keen on shfting this outside of the @avalon namspace because its 
> not different to a @avalon.dependency or @avalon.context - they all 
> relate to lifecycle fulfilment.

Is the issue with @avalon namespace that it should be reserved for only
those tags/features which every container supports? ie- Phoenix doesn't
have lifecycle extensions yet therefore @avalon.stage should be
@lifecycle.stage (or whatever)?  Or is it because lifecycle extensions
are part of excalibur and not framework?

Just trying to understand what and why we want to reserve the @avalon
namespace for.  I suppose this is more a question for Berin.


> 
> Attributes are present in the meta-info model at the level of component, 
> context, dependency, extension, service export, service definition, and 
> stage.  Under the @avalon scheme the only attribute handlined relates to 
> component (via assignment of attributes under the <info> block using the 
> @avalon.attribute tag.  All of the other constructs are basically 
> ignored.  A solution to this that was suggested by Leo it to allow these 
> tags to contain any attributes, and if the attribute is not "type" or 
> "version", we assign the attribute name and value as an attribute of the 
> respective meta-info element. 
> 
> For example:
> 
>   @avalon.dependency type="MyService" version="1.1" color="red"
> 
> would generate the following XML form:
> 
>   <dependency type="MyService" version="1.1">
>     <attributes>
>       <attribute key="color" value="red"/>
>     </attributes>
>   </dependency>

Not sure how much I like this, but it works.  Another alternative would
be a set of tags like:

@avalon.dependency.attribute name="color" value="red"

But I'm not sure if I like that any better.

-- 
 jaaron  <http://jadetower.org>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to