[cdi-dev] where is defined javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id?
jharting at redhat.com
Mon Jan 5 10:19:16 EST 2015
On 01/05/2015 10:09 AM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>>> The spec also only says that the BEAN must have this very name and not that
>>> the bean must be accessible by EL.
>> Given what the name is for in CDI this can be implied.
> well, but it's not up to the CDI impl to do this correctly.
No, my point was that if a bean is given a name it implies that this
bean should be accessible via EL.
>>> If we would really require this and the EL specification doesn't
>>> support it, then the CDI spec would contradict the EL spec, right?
>> No, it would mean that the name should be placed within quotes when
>> accessing the conversation bean from EL.
> The question is whether it really is defined in the EL spec that way. And further if the EL TCK does test this or if this is non-portable. The TCK test doesn't use escaping for what I saw. So this test is not ok.
Right, the TCK test should be fixed to escape the name properly.
> Why didn't we simply use underscores instead of dots? :)
More information about the cdi-dev