<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 5:02 AM, Pete Muir <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pmuir@redhat.com">pmuir@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
On 21 Dec 2008, at 07:32, Gavin King wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Oracle have proposed that we remove the term "Web Bean" from the<br>
specification. I'm therefore searching for alternative terminology.<br>
Please let me know your opinions and suggestions.<br>
<br>
Here's one possibility:<br>
<br>
Web Bean -> injectable type<br>
simple Web Bean -> injectable Java class<br>
enterprise Web Bean -> injectable EJB<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
I really don't like this.<div class="Ih2E3d"></div></blockquote><div><br>Me either.<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Or:<br>
<br>
Web Bean -> contextual type<br>
simple Web Bean -> contextual Java class<br>
enterprise Web Bean -> contextual EJB<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
This is better.</blockquote><div> </div><div>I agree. <br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>
As I said before, I prefer bean to type/class/EJB<br>
</blockquote><div><br><br>
Yeah, "bean" seems less overloaded than the other terms here.<br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
Web Bean -> contextual bean<br>
simple Web Bean -> contextual JavaBean<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
enterprise Web Bean -> contextual EJB<br>
</div></blockquote><div><br><br><br>On the whole, though, I think Web Beans is a better name. It has a lot of recognition already. It seems less boring than the alternatives mentioned here.<br></div></div>I also feel like "simple web bean" will be easier for me to say as I talk to my coworkers about them; "contextual Java class" doesn't come out as nice. <br>
<br><br>I understand that the "web" part of web beans is non optimal, but I haven't seen anything that I believe is better. If I think of something I'll speak up.<br><br>-Matt Drees<br>