The importance of the naming convention adding an export channel

Dear all,
I want to understand the importante of the naming convention in the definition of a new export channel.
I read the guide "Adding Custom Export Channels" here
The guide reports an example thaht adds the export channel in three places: the report viewer, the scheduler, and web services.
Really the guide talks about the report viewer and the scheduler.
I followed all guidelines except one:
That, where the instructions read <MyFormat>, you have used the correct name for your export format. For example, if you're creating an exporter that generates .DBF files, where the instructions describe the Report<MyFormat>Exporter class, your class is called ReportDBFExporter.
At the end of implementation and configuration, the export channel works well for the report viewer and the scheduler.
Also, I use rest apis V2:
example of the usage:
- request 1
<reportParameter name="param001">
<reportParameter name="param002">
- response 1
- request 2
- response 2:
"value": "failed",
"errorCode": "webservices.error.errorExportingReportUnit",
"parameters": [
"Export format wraphtml not supported or misconfigured"
The class name and beannames don't follow guidilines: 
-  class name Report<MyFormat>Exporter
-  bean name <MyFormat>ExportParametersBean
== EDIT 05/10/2015 ==
I changed all definition and the service doesn't still work. Logs aren't helpful. 
mgenova's picture
Joined: Aug 23 2010 - 12:49am
Last seen: 7 years 3 months ago

0 Answers:

No answers yet