I'll jump in though I might be missing some context... ... I wonder if Shaoguang is describing the fact that the component service name must match the implementation service name when you are configuring the component via SCDL (rather than making a statement about the composite service name).
This issue is particularly noticable when there is only one service in a component since in most places SCA lets you be ignorant of the service name of a single-service-component (e.g. when making a wire target). A "guiding exception" would be a nice addition....... Scott On 8/3/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > According to line 1498 on page 34 of the Assembly spec[1] it doesn't sound > like thats correct: > > 1498 • name (required) – the name of the service, the name MUST BE unique > across all the > 1499 composite services in the composite. The name of the composite > service > can be different > 1500 from the name of the promoted component service. > > So the behaviour you're seeing sounds like a bug. Could you raise a JIRA, > and if possible attach some code to demonstrate the problem? > > ...ant > > [1] http://www.oasis-opencsa.org/sca-assembly > > On 8/3/07, shaoguang geng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Just now, I found that the <service name="[name]">, name here must equal > > to the java interface's name, as well the service's name of WSDL, other > > wise, we just see NullPointerException. > > > > I would suggest generate a guiding Exception, to tell the developer this > > "rule" of defining a service. > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's > > on, when. >
