On Jan 24, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
The C++ runtime allows bindings and component implementation types
to share a common Tuscany namespace and updates to them do not
require an update of the Kernel. We simply load the SCDL XSD files
out of each runtime extension directory and they can contribute to
a common namespace.
As far as I know the Java runtime does not load or make any use
of the SCDL XSDs at this point, so I don't understand what the
issues would be with the Java runtime.
The bindings and component implementation types defined by the OSOA
specs are in a single OSOA namespace. I think that the bindings and
component implementation types introduced by the Tuscany project
should be in a single Tuscany namespace.
Extensions provided by other projects can be in other namespaces
obviously.
How does this scheme address the versioning issues associated with
XML namespaces?
The spec addresses them by coordinating releases from all binding and
implementation groups. Doing the same in Tuscany would take us back
to a model where we need to coordinate kernel and all extension
releases which is something we have decided not to do (for very good
reasons).
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
