[cdi-dev] Answer from EL spec lead: no, "." is not valid in an EL name.

[Pete Muir]

I’m afraid I disagree with the reasoning you present and your statements below.

> On 14 Jan 2015, at 15:46, Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de> wrote:
> 
> The spec only says that the Bean must have this name. All the rest is some 3-rd level 'implicit' arguing. The spec does NOT say that the EL "javax...." must give you a Conversation...
> 
> LieGrue,
> strub
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com>
>> To: Jozef Hartinger <jharting at redhat.com>
>> Cc: Edward Burns <edward.burns at oracle.com>; Cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015, 12:20
>> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Answer from EL spec lead: no,	"." is not valid in an EL name.
>> 
>> I don’t think they should be excluded. The spec isn’t ambiguous about this, and 
>> it is supportable.
>> 
>> 
>>> On 14 Jan 2015, at 11:13, Jozef Hartinger <jharting at redhat.com> 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> So for CDI 1.2 the test that tests this should not be excluded after all, 
>> correct?
>>> 
>>> On 01/14/2015 11:56 AM, Pete Muir wrote:
>>>> We need to go for both (A) and (B).
>>>> 
>>>> We would need to deprecate the existing name before we can allow it to 
>> not be supported. This means CDI 3. So I would suggest we deprecate it in 2, add 
>> an alternative that can be used, and then consider removing it in CDI 3. In the 
>> meantime for CDI 2, we will need to improve the TCK to check this more 
>> carefully.
>>>> 
>>>>> On 14 Jan 2015, at 10:09, Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> <rmannibucau at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> +1 for B (IMO it is not used that much)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>> @rmannibucau
>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 2015-01-14 10:54 GMT+01:00 Jozef Hartinger 
>> <jharting at redhat.com>:
>>>>>> 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?)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Jozef
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 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 Lead.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Ed, thanks for helping us!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> LieGrue,
>>>>>>> strub
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 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 name
>>>>>>>> must
>>>>>>>> be a java identifier.  I'm told this was discussed 
>> by Pete a long time
>>>>>>>> ago in the EL 3.0 EG.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Ed
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> | 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
>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> cdi-dev mailing list
>>>>>> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> cdi-dev mailing list
>>>>> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>>>>> 
>>>>> 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.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> cdi-dev mailing list
>> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>> 
>> 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.
>>