-----Original Message----- From: Gavin King [mailto:gavin@hibernate.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 4:48 PM To: Java Community Process JSR #299 Expert List; Michael Keith; Scott Ferguson; Matt Drees; Jim Knutson; WebBeans Subject: Re: New name The name I've had in my head is "Java Contextual Objects". WDYT? > On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 4:22 AM, Michael Youngstrom <youngm(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >> I agree 100%. We need a new name but I can come up with nothing. One >> person in my office suggested "Summer". :) I'll keep racking my >> brain. >> >> Mike >> >> On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 12:21 AM, Gavin King <gavin(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >>> Some people don't like the name of the spec. >>> >>> What would *you* call it? >>> >>> -- >>> Gavin King >>> gavin.king(a)gmail.com >>> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin >>> http://hibernate.org >>> http://seamframework.org >>> >> > > > > -- > Gavin King > gavin.king(a)gmail.com > http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin > http://hibernate.org > http://seamframework.org > -- Gavin King gavin.king(a)gmail.com http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin http://hibernate.org http://seamframework.org

A few ideas, just to illustrate what I mean, and start the naming juices flowing in this direction: Context and Injection Services Container Object Services Container Contexts and Injection Contextual Support for Container Objects

-----Original Message----- From: Scott Ferguson [mailto:ferg@caucho.com] Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 1:06 PM To: Michael Keith Cc: Gavin King; Java Community Process JSR #299 Expert List; Matt Drees; Jim Knutson; WebBeans Subject: Re: New name On Jan 5, 2009, at 5:39 AM, Michael Keith wrote: > > One of the problems with the existing name is that it names a new > type of object, > which gives the impression that a new "component" is being introduced. > Rather, this spec is supposed to be introducing a new set of > container services, so > a better direction might be to name it around the sevices that it is > offering and > not the objects that are the beneficiaries of those services (and > are supposed > to already exist outside of this spec). Excellent point. > A few ideas, just to illustrate what I mean, and start the naming > juices flowing > in this direction: > > Context and Injection Services > Container Object Services > Container Contexts and Injection > Contextual Support for Container Objects I'm not sure I like the literal names. Since the problem to be solved is so general, literal names are also abstract and somewhat meaningless. For example, "container", "context" and "object" are used everywhere, so they don't help explain how this spec is different. > The other option is to give it an arbitrary name and let the > contents speak > for itself (a la "Swing", and other similar randomly-named > technologies). > "Fred" has a nice ring to it ;-) I like "weaver" (or "weave", etc.) It fits the problem because a weaver pulls together materials (components/wool) using a pattern/plan (config or rug pattern), creating the final completed product (application or rug). And it has a vivid image, so you can remember it and distinguish it from other specs. The "weaver pattern" could even be a replacement for "IoC/DI", a name no one really likes. -- Scott

-----Original Message----- From: Scott Ferguson [mailto:ferg@caucho.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 10:49 AM To: Michael Keith Cc: Gavin King; Java Community Process JSR #299 Expert List; Matt Drees; Jim Knutson; WebBeans Subject: Re: New name On Jan 5, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Michael Keith wrote: > > I don't understand why literal names are more meaningless than > abstract ones. They tend to be overused because we have so many concepts to name, and each overloading of the name makes it less meaningful. For example, "context" is one of the most overused terms on the server side: transaction context, security context, class loader context, JNDI naming context, language context (scope), etc. Calling something

a "contextual service" doesn't distinguish it from any other kind of service, because "context" has a low intrinsic information content. > For example, I find something like Contextual Services more > meaningful than "web beans". Since "web beans" isn't a great name either, that's not fair. :-)

> "weave" has kind of already been claimed by the AOP community to > mean byte-enhance. I > expect that by and large that would be the connotation with anything > named after it. The spec does have a bunch of byte-code enhancement and AOP stuff. :-)

> > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Scott Ferguson [mailto:ferg@caucho.com] >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 1:06 PM >> To: Michael Keith >> Cc: Gavin King; Java Community Process JSR #299 Expert List; >> Matt Drees; >> Jim Knutson; WebBeans >> Subject: Re: New name >> >> >> >> On Jan 5, 2009, at 5:39 AM, Michael Keith wrote: >> >>> >>> One of the problems with the existing name is that it names a new >>> type of object, >>> which gives the impression that a new "component" is being >> introduced. >>> Rather, this spec is supposed to be introducing a new set of >>> container services, so >>> a better direction might be to name it around the sevices >> that it is >>> offering and >>> not the objects that are the beneficiaries of those services (and >>> are supposed >>> to already exist outside of this spec). >> >> Excellent point. >> >>> A few ideas, just to illustrate what I mean, and start the naming >>> juices flowing >>> in this direction: >>> >>> Context and Injection Services >>> Container Object Services >>> Container Contexts and Injection >>> Contextual Support for Container Objects >> >> I'm not sure I like the literal names. Since the problem to >> be solved >> is so general, literal names are also abstract and somewhat >> meaningless. For example, "container", "context" and "object" are >> used everywhere, so they don't help explain how this spec is >> different. >> >>> The other option is to give it an arbitrary name and let the >>> contents speak >>> for itself (a la "Swing", and other similar randomly-named >>> technologies). >>> "Fred" has a nice ring to it ;-) >> >> I like "weaver" (or "weave", etc.) It fits the problem because a >> weaver pulls together materials (components/wool) using a >> pattern/plan >> (config or rug pattern), creating the final completed product >> (application or rug). And it has a vivid image, so you can remember >> it and distinguish it from other specs. The "weaver pattern" could >> even be a replacement for "IoC/DI", a name no one really likes. >> >> -- Scott >> >> > >

Michael Keith <MICHAEL.KEITH(a)oracle.com&gt; wrote on 01/05/2009 07:39:27 AM: > Context and Injection Services +1 However, since I see some objections in the replies, perhaps a little more detail in the name might offer up something like: Context Based Component Lifecycle Service

I don't really like the "Service" part of the names given. Is this really a service? To me that implies a piece of code that you give some inputs to, it does some work, and returns a value (over and over). Web Beans goes beyond that. It is more like a manager, system, or controller. Perhaps "Contextual Lifecycle Controller". But that does not really role off the tongue like web beans.

my $.02 Jay On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Gavin King <gavin(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Jim Knutson <knutson(a)us.ibm.com&gt; wrote: > Michael Keith <MICHAEL.KEITH(a)oracle.com&gt; wrote on 01/05/2009 07:39:27 AM: >> Context and Injection Services > > +1 > > However, since I see some objections in the replies, perhaps a little more > detail in the name might offer up something like: > > Context Based Component Lifecycle Service Contextual Lifecycle Service|Manager? -- Gavin King gavin.king(a)gmail.com http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin http://hibernate.org http://seamframework.org _______________________________________________ webbeans-dev mailing list webbeans-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/webbeans-dev -- blog: http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Jay