You originally said that your list was the virtual core of J2EE. That's what you said. You call someone a pedant when you want to demean something they taught you. Anyway, for your "pedantic" purposes:
(*J*ava *2* Platform, *E*nterprise *E*dition) A platform from Sun for building distributed enterprise applications. J2EE services are performed in the middle tier between the user's machine and the enterprise's databases and legacy information systems. J2EE comprises a specification, reference implementation and set of testing suites. Its core component is Enterprise JavaBeans (EJBs), followed by JavaServer Pages (JSPs) and Java servlets and a variety of interfaces for linking to the information resources in the enterprise. The J2EE interfaces include JDBC for databases, JNDI for directories, JTA for transactions, JMS for messaging, JavaMail for e-mail systems and JavaIDL for CORBA connectivity. In December 1999, J2EE Version 1.2 was introduced as the first formal release of the specification. In September 2001, Version 1.3 was released. Java Connectors are interfaces to a variety of legacy applications This is not difficult, but it is not Hiberate, Struts, etc. either. If you think this is "pedantic", perhaps I should point out that the whole trouble here is based on your sweet sciolism. You are right, we would not work well together. I am far too "pedantic" to work with anyone stuck on sciolism for effect. On 12/14/05, Preston Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 08:18 -0800, Dakota Jack wrote: > > Look, Preston, if you want your own language with your own meanings, > that is > > I'm not creating my own language. You're being pedantic. > > http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=toolkit > > Main Entry: toolkit > Part of Speech: noun > Definition: a set of software applications that aid a task; also > written tool kit, also called toolset > Usage: computing > > > fine with me. But, when you are talking to others on a list, we have a > > right to assume that you are using words with their real meaning rather > than > > some idiosyncratic, unknowing, use on your part. Call this "pedantic" > if > > you like. But, if someone doesn't know a toolkit from a framework and > > throws the word "implementation" around like a half-penny, then I > certainly > > don't want them working for me. This is a profession, not a hayride. > > I wouldn't want to work for someone like you who flies off the handle > because they think someone is using the wrong terminology. So I guess > we're on the same page. > > Preston > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~
