Paul Hammant wrote:
Stephen, Leo,[...] A Context contract is
defined by (1) an optional target class,
[...]
A container shall ensure that a context object supplied
to a component shall be castable to a target class or
interface (T). The default target class is Context. A
target class must be derived from or implement the
Context interface.
I'm unhappy with anything other than a base interface (Context) or specialised interfaces (e.g. BlockContext) being used to descibe parameter0 of contextualize for the IS-A proposition. Why? K/HC/CAPI separation; separation of interface and impl etc. As an advocate of the BlockContext (and alike) solution I have no requirement for things like GenericBlockContext (it was a class not an interface).
I agree - it was something that was bugging me about the summary. I would prefer that the value of "type" on a <context> element be restricted to an interface derived from Context. Things like "GenericBlockContext" could appear as part of a creation directive (meta-data), but that has nothing to do with the context criteria expressed by a component towards the container and is not relevant to the Context interface specification.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
