db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Jefferson <a...@jpox.org>
Subject Re: JDO TCK Conference Call Friday, Aug 12, 9 am PST
Date Sat, 13 Aug 2005 07:21:05 GMT
Hi Craig,

> Good point. I was thinking perhaps we should use the same technique
> that we have already used to good effect with collections and maps.
>
> What if we define a new attribute on field called field-type, and for
> the TCK we put in "...SimpleClass"? Would that allow you to map it?
>
> The issue is that Object types need to be supported, but as you point
> out, there's not enough metadata to give an implementation a clue how
> to do it.
>
> What do you think? If it's doable, I can raise it to the jdo-experts.

It certainly sounds doable (not looked at the code ...).
With an attribute like that we would have the same info as for an interface 
and so we can do the same as we do there (and so a 1-1 relation where a class 
has an Object field marked as containing SimpleClass would result in a table 
with a FK column across to the SIMPLECLASS table).

-- 
Andy

Mime
View raw message