On 07/08/11 00:00, Marshall Schor wrote:
>
>
> On 8/4/2011 6:16 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>> Am 04.08.2011 um 23:27 schrieb Marshall Schor:
>>
>>> Many other languages allow both ${xxx} and $xxx - the latter for cases
>>> where the
>>> xxx's are limited to chars + numbers + maybe underscores, dashes, and
>>> periods;
>>> the first character not allowed "stops" the parsing of the name. You still
>>> need
>>> the {} form for such things like ${xxx}yyy or for ${x!_($*} (if you want to
>>> allow that as a "name" - property files do, apparently).
>> How about supporting Commons EL [1] or the Spring Expression Language [2] or
>> JEXL [3]?
>
> All of these are potentially quite complex expression languages, each with
> their
> own particulars.
>
> I think one of the goals of the use cases is to have the "xml" readable by a
> non-expert - someone who's only familiar with XML, perhaps. Simple string
> substitution I think is enough to give the flexibility needed for the use
> cases.
Sorry, can't resist: XML readable by a non-expert seems like a
contradiction in terms.
>
> -Marshall
>>
>> -- Richard
>>
>> [1] http://commons.apache.org/jexl/reference/syntax.html
>> [2]
>> http://static.springsource.org/spring/docs/3.0.x/reference/expressions.html
>> [3] http://commons.apache.org/el/
>>
