> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Blewitt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Sunday, Aug 24, 2003, at 18:17 Europe/London, Bill de h�ra wrote:
>
> > Simon Brooke wrote:
> >
> > Fwiw, I think this is a very good idea and worth adding to
> the codiing
> > conventions. I came to a similar conclusion last week working on
> > something unrelated to Geronimo. The pattern I'd been seeing in
> > .properties were prefixed keys :
> >
> > err.<blah>
> > info.<blah>
> > print.<blah>
> > conf.<blah> (sometimes I hack quick configurations together with
> > string tables)
> >
> > But inconsistently applied across projects.
>
> IBM uses a more terse flavour: it only uses a single
> character for the
> type (I/E/W/A - alert), then a few letters for the product
> name, then a
> numeric code.
>
> I think it would be a good idea to break down such labels as to the
> package that threw them. So you'd have info.o.a.g.mail.blah,
> err(or).o.a.g.mail.blah etc and so forth. I also think that a
> non-numeric code is advisable, so that it is easier for the (human)
> developer to understand the message:
>
> throw new
> I18NException("info.org.apache.geronimo.mail-authentication.failed")
>
> That way, it's easier to 'guess' what the message is than a number,
> which can be mistyped or may not mean anything.
I partially agree w/ this but don't see the point in including the
"org.apache.geronimo". After all, the messages are for geronimo; this is an
obvious implicit understanding. Why overstate it to provide long, unweldy,
keys?
Regards,
Alan
----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com
Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more
information and to register, visit <http://www.reuters.com/messaging>
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of The
Reuters Group.
