On 12/7/06, Pete Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 07/12/06, Pete Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 07/12/06, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 12/7/06, Caroline Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > On 07/12/06, Pete Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you use the Sequence API to add the animals in this case? I > > suspect > > > not > > > > and this highlights a problem in our implementation where, for a > > > Sequenced > > > > DataObject, setting of Properties using the DataObject::setXXX > > methods > > > > should delegate to the Sequence API but do not, so they do not > > appear in > > > > the > > > > sequence. > > > > > > > > > You're correct, I'm not using the Sequence APIs at all, the only > > > difference > > > is that in one case the DataObject is sequenced and in the other it is > > > > > not. > > > > > > If we make the change to delegate the setting of the property so that > > any > > > > setXXX on a sequenced SDO will appear in the sequence there is > > another > > > > question: Should properties that are defined from an XML Schema as > > > > "attributes" be included in the Sequence? I think the answer is NO > > as > > > that > > > > is what wouild be intended by the schema. > > > > > > > > > I agree. > > > > > > -- > > > Caroline > > > > > > On the last point. It depends on what we think a sequence is... > > > > 1/ A sequence of all of the elements and text that appear inside of a > > particular element in an XML document (this excludes attributes as you > > suggest) > > 2/ Just the ordered collection of settings disregarding the fact that it > > will, at some point in the future, become and XML document > > > > If we want SDO to look and feel like an XML document then the answer is > > 1/. > > If we want SDO to be an abstract data interface then the answer is 2/. I > > think the SDO philosophy to date goes with 2/ > > > > If we were to go with 1 we should raise it with the spec people and also > > have a convenient way of telling whether a property is an attribute so > > that > > alongside getting the sequence of properties (elements and text) from a > > data > > object we can go get all the attributes also. > > > > Simon > > > > > If the Type is defined via an XML Schema then we should do 1, and that is > what I am suggesting. > The spec does define methods to determine if Types were defined from XSD > and whether the Property is an element or attribute. > > > An alternative is to always delegate to the Sequence API for setXXX for ANY property on a sequenced DataObject. THis would mean that attributes would be returned via the sequence API. The serialization code would not write these as part of the sequence. This is probably better. -- Pete +1 this is a better approach
Simon
