Justin Edelson wrote:
>> I'm not sure if we should pass in more parameters like the request etc.
>> We could do this however these additional things would be optional as
>> the resource resolver may be used out of the scope of a request.
>
> How about:
>
> interface ResourceDecoratorFilter {
> Resource decorate(Resource resource, Map<String,Object> context);
> }
>
> Having access to the request object is important IMHO.
>
While the map approach would be the most flexible one, I think we don't
need it atm - the problem with the map is that there has to be someone
who fills the map before passing it to the decorator. This is the
resource resolver and the resource resolver itself has no context object
when resources are resolved. It might have the request object, therefore
I think Vidam's proposal is fine.
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler
[email protected]
