On 07.04.2011, at 10:50, Benjamin Eberlei wrote: > Imho it would make sense for each of the components to define them and a > default implementation theirselves and leaving implementations to Bridges. > I.e. > > Symfony\Component\Validator\MessageTranslatorInterface > Symfony\Component\Validator\EnglishValidationMessageTranslator > > In this case we can use keys for all the validation messages, but have them > translated by a largish map inside the "EnglishValidationMessageTranslator". > This way validator can be used out of the box, without any dependencies > > Then we would have: > > Symfony\Bridge\ValidatorTranslation\TranslationMessageTranslator implements > Symfony\Component\Validator\MessageTranslatorInterface that delegates to a > real translator. > > This is exactly how Zeta components does it, which still makes all the > components very independent and uses very small interfaces to allow bridges > (Tie-In components in their naming) to work with each other. > Since I think the number of interfaces that we need to extract to decouple > some of the components is very small the "duplication" of these interrfaces > makes sense and keeps everything simple.
So you are advocating against an API namespace with the interfaces? regards, Lukas Kahwe Smith [email protected] -- If you want to report a vulnerability issue on symfony, please send it to security at symfony-project.com You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "symfony developers" 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/symfony-devs?hl=en
