incubator-graffito-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christophe Lombart <christophe.lomb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Created: (GRFT-37) Final JCR Mapping Document PROPOSAL
Date Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:11:13 GMT
2005/8/27, Sandro Böhme <sandro.boehme@gmx.de>:
> Oliver Kiessler wrote:
> 
> >> >Here is a simplification of the Sandro proposal....
> >>I'm more for a mapping file similar to this:
> >>        <mapping>
> >>            <classAttributes
> >>packageName="org.apache.portals.graffito.jcr.testmodel"
> >>className="CmsObject"/>
> >>            <nodeTypeAttributes nodeTypeName="graffito:CmsObject">
> >>                <supertype>nt:base</supertype>
> >>            </nodeTypeAttributes>
> >>            <subitemMapping propertyName="objectId" parameterType="long"
> >>jcrPropertyDefinition name="graffito:parentId" />
> >>       </mapping>
> >>
> >>

ahh ok for this one. I spoke the first mapping file (whith
getter/setter). The first one was too verbose.

A couple of minors change I would like to add : 
* group on the same attribute the pck name and the class name. Why are
split them into 2 attributes ?
* Rename some tags to be more explicit for the end-user : 
-ClassAttribute into classdescriptor or something like
that."Attribute" is not really appropriate here.
- subItemMapping into fielddescriptor or something like that. As
explained in the proposal doc, we need to map simple fieds, bean
fields and collection. So, we need to use different tags for that.

I have not yet thinking about the nt tags.

Oho, I think both proposal becomes more and more similar. That's good :-)

Mime
View raw message