> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mu Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 5:21 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: fortress: configurations of service implementaions must be on the
> root level?
>
> the xconf file
> <my-system>
> <AnotherRunner id="Runner.Another" name="I M ANOTHER RUNNER" age="18" />
> <AnotherRunner id="Runner.Another0" name="I M ANOTHER RUNNER0"
> weight="68" default="true"/>
> <DefaultRunner id="Runner.Default" name="I M DEFAULT RUNNER"/>
> </my-system>
>
> This is the right form of the xconf file, but can I write it this way?
>
> <my-system>
> <Runner description="the bootstrap class">
> <AnotherRunner id="Runner.Another" name="I M ANOTHER RUNNER" age="18" />
> <AnotherRunner id="Runner.Another0" name="I M ANOTHER RUNNER0"
> weight="68" default="true"/>
> <DefaultRunner id="Runner.Default" name="I M DEFAULT RUNNER"/>
> </Runner>
> </my-system>
I had the same question when I started. Fortress expects all components to
be on the root - 1 level, unless you're using hierarchical containers.
So:
<my-system>
<component1/>
<component2/>
<component3/>
</my-system>
is valid, while
<my-system>
<components>
<component1/>
<component2/>
</components>
<component3/>
</my-system>
is not valid.
I once thought of ways we could extend Fortress to either automatically
create hierarchical containers or to just search the XML for all valid
component shortcuts, but any of these extensions get messy pretty quickly.
J. Aaron Farr
SONY ELECTRONICS
DDP-CIM
(724) 696-7653
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
