[slf4j-dev] slf4j i8ln

[近藤 健]

Hi

I think i8n is important feature, but  separating message and level in  
the call from declaring class lead other feature.

* about message
My customer almost claim documentation of log message list. so I've  
developed documentation tool to convert to MS Excel from log message  
enum. this development is easy if log message is collected.

* about log level
Around me, error level log is trigger to inform system problem to  
person in charge. if error log is out, person in charge is called even  
if it is the middle of the night.
so I frequently change log level to adapt operation environment.  log  
level hard coding afflict me.

Takeshi

On 2009/08/18, at 22:38, Pete Muir wrote:

> To follow up on this, Mark Little pointed me at the Common Logging  
> Framework developed by Arjuna as another way this problem has been  
> addressed in the past.
>
> See http://docs.jboss.org/process-guide/en/html/internationalization.html#d0e4183
>
> On 17 Aug 2009, at 18:05, Pete Muir wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> As discussed here https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/WBRI-290, we  
>> would like to switch to slf4j as our logger (it offers a logging  
>> facade, supports MDC/NDC and parameter replacement).
>>
>> However, as Takeshi highlights here https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/WBRI-214 
>> , a needed feature is explicit i8n support, and it sounds like Ceki  
>> would be happy to accept a contribution for this directly to the  
>> slf4j.
>>
>> Perhaps, to get started, we should discuss the overall design and  
>> aims. In the linked issue, Takeshi adds three features in the patch:
>>
>> - ability to localize a message by providing a resource bundle,  
>> which has the same name as the class using the logger (the  
>> declaring class)
>> - the ability to log an enum value (rather than using a static to  
>> hold the message/key)
>> - the ability to associate the level at which to log with the  
>> message with the enum (via an annotation) rather than in the call  
>> from the declaring class
>>
>> (Takeshi, correct me if this is incorrect). I think we can probably  
>> separate these features out when discussing.
>>
>> I think we would also need:
>>
>> - ability to specify the resource bundle to use when getting the  
>> logger
>> - ability to use statics fields or just a string id embedded in  
>> call to logger
>>
>> But I'm sure others have given this more thought than me!
>>
>> Pete
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev mailing list
>> dev at slf4j.org
>> http://www.slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>