On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Raymond Feng <[email protected]> wrote:
> 4) Having an XML representation of the node configuration is good. It can > serve as the canonical persistence format. Sure, the node configuration can > be derived from many options: > * arguments on the command line > * programmatically via the NodeConfiguration model APIs > * from a live URL to the domain manager > * from classpath discovery > * ... What are the use cases for the XML representation? We dont actually have anything in 2.x that needs this yet, could it be left till there is something? > 4) I don't think node/@uri should be removed. Multiple nodes can have the > same domain URI and domain registry URI. The node URI should uniquely > identifies a node within an SCA domain. We can use a simple name instead of > URI. > What are the use cases for the node URI? The "node" is a concept thats not in any SCA spec which we're making up for Tuscany so I'm trying to understand if there are real reasons for needing to expose a node uri in any user API? ...ant
