Hi,
On 07.01.2010 03:59, Justin Edelson wrote:
> On 1/6/10 4:33 PM, Felix Meschberger wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 06.01.2010 22:16, Justin Edelson wrote:
>>
>>> 3) I've been kicking around the idea that it would be nice for the
>>> scripting
>>> binding to be expandable. Given a service interface like this:
>>>
>>> public interface SlingScriptBindingValuesProvider {
>>> void addBindings(Bindings bindings);
>>> }
>>>
>>> DefaultSlingScript could then find all services and invoke them. A
>>> service
>>> property could be used to limit the scope of a provider to one or more
>>> scripting languages (for example, the JSONGroovyBuilder should only
>>> go into
>>> the binding for Groovy scripts).
>>>
>>> If this was done, then currentNode could be kept in the binding by
>>> creating
>>> a SlingScriptBindingValuesProvider in one of the jcr bundles and the jcr
>>> dependency could be removed from scripting core. Of course now there's a
>>> dependency between a jcr bundle and scripting API, but perhaps that
>>> could be
>>> optional (or, at least, acceptable).
>>>
>> This sounds like an interesting approach, indeed !
>>
>> Regards
>> Felix
>>
>>
> interesting == good or interesting == bad?
>
>
interesting == good == definitely worth following up on
Regards
Felix
