> 1) Can we still use the mapping file format, or what you prefer
> something else?
I guess we should actually preserve the model. This is what gives us
interoperability which is a good thing and I think is actually protected
under certain laws (DMCA?).
> 2) How worthwhile is this whole XMLCoding interface business? I.e., the
> ability to control encoding without a mapping file? NB, with what I
> provided, arbitrary objects can still be encoded/decoded, thanks to the
> java.beans.XMLEncoder and java.beans.XMLDecoder classes . . . This is
> just more useful for archiving data, rather than as an XML view or data
> interchange.
I can't comment on that - I never used it myself. I guess it is up to you.
> 3) If I'm gonna change the API anyway, does anyone care if I add more
> things to it? E.g., it's not clear to me using the existing API how to
> encode a List of query results without it being a hassle. I think some
> mechanism to do this automatically would be nice (obviously, being able
> to decode as well).
Sure, go for it. This sounds pretty useful to me.
Andrus
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Dec 06 2004 - 15:53:41 EST