You're right, the PID has no specified syntax, just a recommendation.
Kind regards,
Peter Kriens
On 15 mrt 2010, at 09:43, Marcel Offermans wrote:
> On Mar 15, 2010, at 9:38 , Felix Meschberger wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 15.03.2010 09:25, Marcel Offermans wrote:
>>> On Mar 15, 2010, at 9:09 , Felix Meschberger wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have an incertainty about Service PID syntax as well as enforcement of
>>>> it in the ConfigurationAdmin service.
>>>>
>>>> As specified in Section 5.2.6, Persistent Identifier (PID), a PID is
>>>> defined the same as a symbolic-name as defined in Section 1.3.2, General
>>>> Syntax Definitions (all in the R 4.2 Core Spec). Such PIDs are referred
>>>> to in the Configuration Admin specification to identify configurations.
>>>>
>>>> My questions:
>>>>
>>>> (1) One of the examples in Section 104.3.1.3, Devices, of the
>>>> Compendium spec seems to violate this restriction proposing
>>>> the string "802-00:60:97:00:9A:56" as a PID (this is invalid
>>>> because colons are not allowed in symbolic names).
>>>> Is this a bug or intention ?
>>>
>>> Both 5.2.6 and 104.3.1 mention that a PID *SHOULD* (not MUST) follow the
>>> symbolic-name syntax.
>>
>> Oh ! I missed that point ...
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Thus, if Secion 104.4.2, Configuration Properties, in the compendium
>> spec says "The format of a property name should be:" it actually means,
>> may or may not be ...
>>
>> Hmm, then the Felix Configuration Admin implementation would actually be
>> too strict with respect to validating property keys ... (we throw if the
>> actual property format does not match the definition)
>
> That is how I would interpret the specs, yes, but I would not mind hearing
> the opinion of others on this.
>
> Greetings, Marcel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OSGi Developer Mail List
> [email protected]
> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
_______________________________________________
OSGi Developer Mail List
[email protected]
https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
