[cdi-dev] Fw: Answer from EL spec lead: no, "." is not valid in an EL name.
struberg at yahoo.de
Wed Jan 14 10:43:57 EST 2015
C'mon Jozef, your approach is NOT portable. This will trash all other javax ELResolvers. You fix a broken CDI paragraph by utterly and finally breaking another framework. That's just no solution.
----- Original Message -----
> From: Jozef Hartinger <jharting at redhat.com>
> To: Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de>; Cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Cc: Edward Burns <edward.burns at oracle.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015, 10:54
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Fw: Answer from EL spec lead: no, "." is not valid in an EL name.
> I think further action is needed on this. Now that it has been confirmed
> that "javax.enterprise.context.conversation" itself is not a valid EL
> name we should either:
> A) Require all CDI implementations to adapt the property-based approach
> which allows this to be implemented portably (as Weld does)
> B) Declare publicly that although the CDI spec declares the given name,
> it is a bug and applications should not use the name. (What about
> compatibility with existing applications?)
> On 01/08/2015 09:27 AM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>> Dear CDI fellows!
>> I've received an answer regarding our EL question from the EL Spec
>> Ed, thanks for helping us!
>>> On Tuesday, 6 January 2015, 23:14, Edward Burns
> <edward.burns at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> Hello Mark,
>>> To close this out, no, "." is not valid in an EL name. An EL
>>> be a java identifier. I'm told this was discussed by Pete a long
>>> ago in the EL 3.0 EG.
>>> | edward.burns at oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017
>>> | 42 days til DevNexus 2015
>>> | 52 days til JavaLand 2015
>>> | 62 days til CONFESS 2015
>> cdi-dev mailing list
>> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2
> (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas provided
> on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property
> rights inherent in such information.
More information about the cdi-dev