On Jan 19, 2011, at 7:15 PM, Domizio Demichelis wrote: > I like the 'lifecycle' namespace, but I don't like to put the state keys > directly under it, like the proposed: > activerecord.attributes.<model>.lifecycle.<state> > > We would have something like: > > activerecord: > attributes: > user: > name: Name > state: State > lifecycle: > active: active > foo: foo > bar: bar > > The 'states' are not 'lifecycles' so I would prefer: > > activerecord: > attributes: > user: > name: Name > state: State > states: > active: Active > foo: Foo > bar: Bar > transitions: > bla: > > which IMHO is simpler and straightforward. But adding the lifecycle makes it > looks right: > > activerecord: > attributes: > user: > name: Name > state: State > lifecycle: > states: > active: Active > foo: Foo > bar: Bar > transitions: > bla: > > I vote for this one. In this case I would add the 'lifecycle' to the > transition too. Anybody agree?
+1 on this - I'd completely forgotten about translating transition names when I made my earlier post. --Matt Jones -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hobo Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hobousers?hl=en.
