Re: Minimal set of component attributes?

Stephen McConnell wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> This one.  It is much easier to mark an interface with a flag
>> than to rely on the fact that I have a memory like a seive.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL :-)
> 
> Know what you mean.  However, it's problamatic in that it locks you into 
> a model where the interface can only be a work interface and cannot be 
> applied as a internal interface.  I've thought about the same approach 
> with respect to lifecycle stages in Merlin and reached the conclusion 
> that its too restrictive - ended up focussing on explicity declaring the 
> published services, lifecycle extensions, etc.  in the component. But 
> keep in mind that what I have been doing is still real early.



Who said you can't have it both ways?  I have seen nothing to restrict
us to forcing only one way on the attribute declarations.