hi rudy,

+1 for thinking about a suggested name convention.

@ #2: imo it's confusing for people to see an org.apache.* prefix outside an
apache project.
@ #3: you don't lose the information that it is related to extval, because
it's part of the package name.

what's about the suggestion that extval add-ons should use *.jsf.extval.* as
part of the package as well as config parameter names.
so we don't have to change existing implementations. the suggestion includes
the optional config via ExtValContext#globalProperties.

regards,
gerhard

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces



2010/6/11 Rudy De Busscher <[email protected]>

> Hi All,
>
> For the advanced version of the required label add-on, I would like to have
> some initialisation parameters in web.xml so that the developer could
> customize the add-on.
>
> To my knowledge, there isn't any add-on for the moment that have such
> initialisation parameters.  So I would like to have the opinion of others
> about the 'namespace' we could use for it.
>
> I see 3 possible options:
> 1) Use the 'org.apache.myfaces.extensions.validator' prefix like the
> parameters for the core/validation modules. (example :
> org.apache.myfaces.extensions.validator.CUSTOM_MESSAGE_BUNDLE)
> This could maybe confusing as it isn't used by the core/validation modules.
>
> 2) Use a prefix that clearly indicate that it is related to the add-ons
> like 'org.apache.myfaces.extensions.validator.addon.label' (example
> org.apache.myfaces.extensions.validator.addon.label.REQUIRED_MARKER)
> In this case there will be a mismatch between java classes packages and the
> initialisation parameter prefix. But on the other hand, it clearly indicates
> what the intention is.
>
> 3) Since add-ons code isn't placed in the
> org.apache.myfaces.extensions.validator package, we could use the package
> structure 'at.gp.web.jsf.extval.label' (or whatever the main package of the
> add-on is in)
> But in this option we loose the information that it is related to ExtVal.
>
>
> I prefer option 2.
>
> Although we can't force the usage of such a prefix to anyone who writes an
> add-on, The add-ons written by the Myfaces group could use some standard.
>
> Let me know your ideas/thoughts.
>
> Regards
> Rudy.
>
>

Reply via email to