I am with Greg here, I prefer default-context-path to default-context-root.
default-context-path is more in keeping with everything else in the spec, IMHO the fact that some
non spec extensions have called it something different should not stop us adopting a spec consistent
naming convention.
Stuart
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Edward Burns" <edward.burns_at_oracle.com>
> To: jsr369-experts_at_servlet-spec.java.net
> Sent: Thursday, 3 September, 2015 10:33:24 PM
> Subject: [jsr369-experts] Re: [servlet-spec users] Re: Re: Re: SERVLET_SPEC-137: Allow context root
>
> >>>>> On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 17:53:26 +1000, Greg Wilkins <gregw_at_webtide.com>
> >>>>> said:
>
> GW> I would much prefer the name context-path or default-context-path as this
> GW> directly relates to the getContextPath method.
> GW> Calling it context-root is confusing.
>
> I'm going to come out in favor of <default-context-root> here. Greg,
> while you are correct to point out the desired parity with the
> getContextPath() method name, the fact that so many of the other
> containers call it context-root makes me favor that option.
>
> Ed
> --
> | edward.burns_at_oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017
> | 43 Business days til JavaOne 2015
> | 58 Business days til DOAG 2015
>