Re: Simplifying Properties / use of Registries...

[Asankha C. Perera]

Ruwan <synapse>     <registry>             <parameter ..... remote registry definition parameters........ />*            <registry-entry key="string"  [src=""]>   string? | <inline-xml/>?  <registry-entry/>*     </registry>?     <proxy-service name="string" [transports="(http |https |jms )+|all"]>....   </proxy-service>*     <sequence ....>+     <endpoint ...>* </synapse> Got the point.. and I am ok with this..... But why do we need registry-entry inside registry-entry???? Its not registry-entry inside registry-entry, but registry-entry also pushed under the main <registry> definition tag, which we will have anyway.. .... introduce another sequence named "error" (or something better if someone would like to propose) that will get called on any un-handled error conditions. Yes... a big +1. how about the name "fault" for the error sequence.. Yes, fault would be good! asankha --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]