<div dir="ltr">To play devil's advocate and argue against my own point, it is somewhat telling that at least two members of the Bean Validation EG maintain separate object transformation-related libraries. ;) Still, I have a hard time envisioning what a related specification would look like, regardless of under which EG's umbrella it was done.<div>
<br></div><div>Matt</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edward Burns <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:edward.burns@oracle.com" target="_blank">edward.burns@oracle.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">>>>>> On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 09:30:36 +0200, Gunnar Morling <<a href="mailto:gunnar@hibernate.org">gunnar@hibernate.org</a>> said:<br>
<br>
GM> I also think a dedicated spec would make sense, but it should be made sure<br>
GM> that BV and such a new spec work nicely together.<br>
<br>
Here my long experience with JCP prompts me to say that in this case,<br>
the domain of conversion is close enough to validation as to make it<br>
worthwhile to keep in BV.<br>
<br>
Don't forget, we already have so many specs that it's a job even for me<br>
to keep up, let alone someone who doesn't get paid full time to do so.<br>
<br>
At Oracle at least, the oversight for creating a new JSR sets a rather<br>
high bar.<br>
<br>
Ed<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
beanvalidation-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:beanvalidation-dev@lists.jboss.org">beanvalidation-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>