> Most popular camel syntaxes do not support extensions by 3rd party elements > (I mean Java and XML). > Everything then goes directly to core.
Extending Scala DSL is trivial as Scala provides traits and implicit conversions. As i mentioned already in Java is doable if we deprecate chained builder syntax like... from(...).marshal().xstream().to(...) ... in the favor of nested builders and static imports... import static org.apache.camel.dataformat.XStreamDslBuilder.*; from(...).marshal(xstream()).to(...); ...and parametrized DataFormatDefinition (with static imports for syntactic sugar)... import static org.apache.camel.dataformat.XStreamDslBuilder.xstream; from(...).marshal(xstream).setXStream(...).to(...); The bigger issue is the XML DSL syntax. Maybe additional namespace per component will solve the issue? But I'm not so sure if this approach will address our requirements. > Camel core should be separated from DSL. > DSL should be built on top of core, not otherwise. +1 -- Henryk Konsek http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com
