I guess I still have a worry about this.  If I were to take "contextual
bean" as a term without the context of this discussion, I would initially
assume that this is a different kind of bean.  As I understand it so far,
that is not the case.  

Since this is intended to be integrated with the Java EE platform, can't
we just use the platform term "EJB" or enterprise bean and let the EJB
spec. scope the possibilities of what that means?

If we can't do that, can we just make the term simply component or bean?

Thanks,
Jim Knutson
WebSphere J2EE Architect

gavin.king@gmail.com wrote on 12/30/2008 03:45:51 PM:

> OK, so does anyone in the group *object* to the term "contextual bean"
> for what is currently called a "web bean"?
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Matt Drees <matt.drees@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 5:02 AM, Pete Muir <pmuir@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 21 Dec 2008, at 07:32, Gavin King wrote:
> >>
> >>> Oracle have proposed that we remove the term "Web Bean" from the
> >>> specification. I'm therefore searching for alternative terminology.
> >>> Please let me know your opinions and suggestions.
> >>>
> >>> Here's one possibility:
> >>>
> >>> Web Bean -> injectable type
> >>> simple Web Bean -> injectable Java class
> >>> enterprise Web Bean -> injectable EJB
> >>
> >> I really don't like this.
> >
> > Me either.
> >
> >>
> >>> Or:
> >>>
> >>> Web Bean -> contextual type
> >>> simple Web Bean -> contextual Java class
> >>> enterprise Web Bean -> contextual EJB
> >>
> >> This is better.
> >
> >
> > I agree.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> As I said before, I prefer bean to type/class/EJB
> >
> >
> > Yeah, "bean" seems less overloaded than the other terms here.
> >
> >>
> >> Web Bean -> contextual bean
> >> simple Web Bean -> contextual JavaBean
> >> enterprise Web Bean -> contextual EJB
> >
> >
> >
> > 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.
> > I also feel like "simple web bean" will be easier for me to say asI talk to
> > my coworkers about them; "contextual Java class" doesn't come out as nice.
> >
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > -Matt Drees
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Gavin King
> gavin.king@gmail.com
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> http://hibernate.org
> http://seamframework.org