This is an inconsistency in the way we've defined the component namespaces from
the beginning.
In a war file, all classes share a single component namespace.
In an ejb-jar file, each EJB component gets its own component namespace.
We talked about this when we introduced the new java:module namespace in EE 6
and decided not to "fix" it.
Antonio Goncalves wrote on 05/15/12 08:21:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm coming back to this topic because I'm working for a customer's project and
> here is what I see in the ejb-jar.xml file :
>
> <ejb-jar xmlns="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee"
> version="3.1"
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
> xsi:schemaLocation="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee
> http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee/ejb-jar_3_1.xsd">
>
> <enterprise-beans>
> <session>
> <ejb-name>AccountService</ejb-name>
> <ejb-class>fr.xxx.AccountService</ejb-class>
> *<data-source>*
> <description>H2 DataSource</description>
> <name>java:global/jdbc/H2DS</name>
> <class-name>org.h2.jdbcx.JdbcDataSource</class-name>
> <url>jdbc:h2:~/H2DB;AUTO_SERVER=TRUE</url>
> </data-source>
> </session>
> </enterprise-beans>
>
> </ejb-jar>
>
> I hadn't pay attention before, but the <data-source> element is nested into
> the <session> element. Which is not the case in the web.xml where
> the <data-source> element is at the root. Why is not <data-source> defined at
> the root ? It should be "the datasource is defined for all EJBs so it's at the
> root of the xml file", no ?
>
> Antonio
>
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 2:06 AM, Linda DeMichiel <linda.demichiel_at_oracle.com
> <mailto:linda.demichiel_at_oracle.com>> wrote:
>
> We've gotten feedback from our internal team, including connector lead,
> that we should also include metadata for connector administered objects.
>
> While I had initially thought that the proposed connector resource definition
> metadata was flexible enough to accommodate this (especially since we
> had already covered the most important administered object case, JMS
> destination objects), I agree that it would be clearer for developers if we
> separate out this additional case.
>
> I plan to add a subsection to the spec to cover this in the EDR we submit
> to the JCP. Please let me know asap if you disagree with this.
>
> Draft annotation and XML element are below. I propose that the annotation
> should be added to javax.resource
>
> thanks,
>
> -Linda
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
>
> /**
> * Annotation used to define a Connector administered object to be
> * registered in JNDI.
> *
> * Once defined, an administered object may be referenced
> * by a component using the lookup element of the
> * Resource annotation.
> *
> */
> @Retention(RUNTIME)
> @Target({TYPE})
> public @interface AdministeredObjectDefinition {
>
> /**
> * Description of the administered object.
> */
> String description() default "";
>
> /**
> * JNDI name of the administered object being defined.
> */
> String name();
>
> /**
> * Type of the administered object.
> */
> String className();
>
> /**
> * Name of the resource adapter.
> */
> String resourceAdapterName() default "";
>
> /**
> * Properties of the administered object. These may be
> * vendor-specific properties.
> */
> String[] properties() default {};
> }
>
>
> XML example:
>
> <administered-object>
> <description>Sample Admin Object definition</description>
> <name>java:app/MyAdminObject</name>
> <class-name>com.extraServices.AdminObject</class-name>
> <resource-adapter-name>myESRA</resource-adapter-name>
> <property>
> <name>Property1</name>
> <value>10</value>
> </property>
> <property>
> <name>Property2</name>
> <value>20</value>
> </property>
> </administered-object>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Antonio Goncalves
> Software architect and Java Champion
>
> Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org> | Twitter
> <http://twitter.com/agoncal> | Blog
> <http://feeds.feedburner.com/AntonioGoncalves> | LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris JUG <http://www.parisjug.org>