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: Issue 138: Names of optional features
Date Thu, 02 Feb 2006 12:46:48 GMT
Hi Craig,

> Heterogeneous collections with new-class mapping of subclasses
> javax.jdo.option.mapping.JoinedTablePerClass (this is tck schema1)
> javax.jdo.option.mapping.JoinedTablePerConcreteClass (this is tck schema3)
> javax.jdo.option.mapping.NonJoinedTablePerConcreteClass (this is tck schema2)

These names mean nothing to me. I would personally prefer something using the
inheritance-strategy names. e.g
(I think that's what these 3 inheritance schema TCK tests were for)

Just wondered whether it's only me who hasn't a clue what a
"NonJoinedTablePerConcreteClass" means :-)

> Mapping fields of Object type and interface types
> javax.jdo.option.mapping.HeterogeneousObjectType (no tck tests yet)
> javax.jdo.option.mapping.HeterogeneousInterfaceType (no tck tests yet)

What do these mean exactly ?
Support for a field of type java.lang.Object with multiple possible PC types that
can be stored in that field ?
Support for a field of type interface with multiple possible PC implementations
that can be stored in that field ?
No problem with the names, as long as we have a definition.


View raw message