Richard Monson-Haefel wrote:
>
> I would be interested in hearing if vendors think that having both an
> ejb-name and an abstract-schema-name is redundant.
Well I can't see the use for it! Perhaps Linda can enlighten us.
> Both must be unique
> within an ejb-jar file, so both uniquely identify a bean deployment. One
> difference is, the abstract-schema-names can only be declared by entity
> beans. Also the assembler is not allowed to change the
> abstract-schema-name, but may change the ejb-name of a bean.
>
> The real clue seems to be a foot note [19] on page 124 of EJB 2.0 PFD2
> which states "Use of ejb-names in EJB QL is reserved for future use."
> I would like to know what this future use is?
>
> Richard
> --
> Richard Monson-Haefel
> Author of Enterprise JavaBeans, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly 2000)
> Co-Author of Java Message Service (O'Reilly 2000)
> http://www.jMiddleware.com
>
> ===========================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
--
________________________________________________________________________________
Evan Ireland Sybase EAServer Engineering [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wellington, New Zealand +64 4 934-5856
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
