ok, will change this => ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-6154
stefan >-----Original Message----- >From: Konrad Windszus [mailto:konra...@gmx.de] >Sent: Friday, October 14, 2016 1:14 PM >To: dev@sling.apache.org >Subject: Re: [context-aware config] property names camel case? > >I would also prefer camelcase. >See other places in Sling like >https://sling.apache.org/documentation/bundles/resource-merger.html ><https://sling.apache.org/documentation/bundles/resource-merger.html> or >https://sling.apache.org/documentation/the-sling-engine/mappings-for- >resource-resolution.html <https://sling.apache.org/documentation/the-sling- >engine/mappings-for-resource-resolution.html>. > >> On 14 Oct 2016, at 13:04, Carsten Ziegeler <cziege...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Stefan Seifert wrote >>> in [1] oliver mentioned the usage of property names in the current >implementation: >>> >>> sling:config-ref >>> sling:config-collection-inherit >>> sling:config-property-inherit >>> >>> should we use headless camel case instead? is this more consistent with >the other parts of sling? >>> >>> sling:configRef >>> sling:configCollectionInherit >>> sling:configPropertyInherit >>> >>> >> As mentioned as a response to Olli camel case would be more consistent. >> So if it is not too much work, we should change it. Otherwise I think it >> is not that important. >> >> Carsten >> >> >> >> -- >> Carsten Ziegeler >> Adobe Research Switzerland >> cziege...@apache.org >>
