> -----Original Message-----
> From: Emmanuel Bourg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:54 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [logging] Enterprise Common Logging... dare we say 2.0?
>
> I'm not a logging expert, but couldn't the internationalized
> logger be
> just a specific Log implementation ? You would just log the
> key of the
> message with the existing methods :
>
> log.warn("key");
>
> The Locale would be a configuration parameter. There is just an issue
> with the message's parameters :) This will require at least an
> additional method like warn(String, Object[]).
Since all of the logging methods (fatal, error, etc.) accept a message
of type Object, you could support i18n/l10n by doing something like the
following:
log.warn(new Message("key", params));
where params is an Object[]. Of course, Message could have additional
constructors.
The Message class would encapsulate all l10n functionality. This way,
you probably wouldn't even have to create any new implementations
specifically for handling i18n/l10n. Further, you probably wouldn't
even have to modify existing Log implementations since most of them
(perhaps all?) just end up doing something like String.valueOf(message)
to get the actual text to log. Therefore, the new Message class would
simply implement toString to properly construct the localized message.
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
