On Sat, 2006-06-17 at 07:53 -0500, R J Scheuerle Jr wrote: > My concern is that the OMOWE is not like a normal OMElement. It will > not have a Namespace when it is constructed. > (To get the namespace/localpart, the implementation would need to > examine the underlying Object...which would cause a serialization (for > JAXB)... > which defeats the whole effort...)
I don't like that model .. why not say that any subclass of OMElement *must* be an honest-to-goodness OMElement .. which means that it MUST have a QName. So we can just have the constructor take that as input .. that way the same object can be serialized as different QNames even. Sanjiva. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
