Re: [Springframework-developer] flexible configuration schemas (beyond javabeans)

[Rob R. <rob...@ur...>]

Keith, I like this proposal. It would seem like these different
config approaches could just be add-ons as different
implementations of BeanFactory and/or ApplicationContext. 

I still use Webwork 1.4, partially because of its simple
configuration, and I actually still use the properties file. I
don't mind XML, but sometimes a properties file can be just as
easy to understand and less typing. Your example below could
become:

myValidateableBean.class=com.MyValidateableBean
myValidateableBean.validateableProperty.continueOnError=false
myValidateableBean.validateableProperty.mandatory=true
myValidateableBean.validateableProperty.maxLength=25
myValidateableBean.validateableProperty.uniqueName=true

which might actually be more typing than XML because of the
long-ish bean name and property name, but it'd just be an
option. As you mention, the work would be in building the
processing code to read in the configuration.

I think Rod's original J2EE book introduced the BeanFactory
concept and used properties as an example of configuration. I
believe properties are still supported, but not to the extent
that XmlBeanFactory is supported.

But anyways, perhaps a "contrib" module for Spring would be good
for alternate forms of configuration. I don't have any
objections to the current XmlBeanFactory, but there are probably
situations where the configuration could be a little more
simple.

Rob



---- On Wed, 18 Feb 2004, Keith Donald (kd...@cs...)
wrote:

> <validator class="com.MyValidateableBean"
objectName="myValidateableBean">
>     <property name="validateableProperty"
continueOnError="false">
>         <rule type="mandatory"/>
>         <rule type="maxLength"/>
>             <parameter name="value" value="25"/>
>         </rule>
>         <rule type="uniqueName"/>
>     </property>
> </validator>
>