Shall we go with the fix I sent in then?

If it turns out to be the wrong the to have done, it's easy enough to change
later on!

Brian,

On 5/10/06, Sanka Samaranayake (JIRA) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

   [
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WSCOMMONS-23?page=comments#action_12378842]

Sanka Samaranayake commented on WSCOMMONS-23:
---------------------------------------------


My concern was that whether we should maintain those special attributes
like Id, Name as fields and maintain the extensibility attributes in a
Hashtable. Then we don't need to add in special processing for
addAttribute() and removeAttribute() calls.

But since we've already agreed to treat them like any other attributes
(and it seems to be a much cleaner and a simpler approach) I am fine with
saying that we treat Id, Name like any other attributes and
clearAttributes() call will erase everything.


> Fix attribute problems in Test_Policy
> -------------------------------------
>
>          Key: WSCOMMONS-23
>          URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WSCOMMONS-23
>      Project: WS-Commons
>         Type: Bug

>   Components: Policy
>     Reporter: Brian Hulse
>  Attachments: Test_Policy.txt
>
> I haven't been consisitent with my model here. I believe that
architeched attributes, like Id, should be treated as other attributes as
this will ease the burden of serialization/deserialization ... which is how
the code works at the moment. However, these tests assume otherwise.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
  http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
  http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


Reply via email to