Let's use a more concrete example. Let's say InterfaceA is Authorizer and InterfaceB is Listener and you want to call both of them "Managers". I don't think you should do this and I think tapestry is forcing good practices onto you. Your service ID's don't seem very descriptive to me. I think it's much better to have service ID's of "ManagersAuthorizer" and a "ManagersListener".
On a slightly related topic, tapestry can use a service interface + marker annotation to uniquely identify a service if more than two implementations exist for a service interface (http://tapestry.apache.org/injection-faq.html). Perhaps you could create annotations for Users, Managers and Officers to do what you want? -- View this message in context: http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/Suggestion-regarding-service-ID-tp5716740p5716752.html Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
