[jsr-314-open-mirror] [jsr-314-open] [859-MultiActionComponent] RESOLVED

[Andy Schwartz]

On 10/29/10 1:52 AM, Martin Marinschek wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> targetAttributeName is problematic for me if we want to move to a
> world "without" the target attribute. If we really want to allow
> everything to work in this way, we need the implementation to pull the
> method-expressions in - and not the interface to push them down.
>
> In such a world, the attribute name "targetAttributeName" is
> meaningless, at least to my understanding.
>   

I can kind of see this as a valid name even in a world where "targets" 
never existed, though I would simplify to "targetName" (the "attribute" 
part is implied by the name of the tag).  In such a world, the "name" 
attribute provides a "source name" which can be mapped to some other 
value - that value being the "target name".  Maybe a bit of a stretch, 
but I think it could work.  :-)

If we want to avoid the "target" terminology, perhaps something more 
along the lines of "role" or "processAs"?

Andy