1. How can I define wrapCollectionsInElement for particular composite property of the bean. Or in general, how can i access ElementDescriptor for particular bean.
i'm a little unclear about exactly what you're asking here.
are you asking how you can set wrapCollectionsInElement for a particular property (rather than globally for every property)?
the answer is - at the moment, there is no way. on the other hand, it is on the to do list and i'd be willing to take a stab at an implementation if you need it. i'd probably an element attribute whose presence would override the writer setting when that element is written.
as for the second question, you can totally replace the betwixt introspection system by plugging an custom XMLBeanInfoRegistry. just create your own class extending XMLBeanInfo which contains a description of you bean. then create a XMLBeanInfoRegistry which contains supplies an instance whenever the class is requested.
another item on the to do list is a XMLBeanInfoRegistry which would have a protected set of XMLBeanInfo implementations to make this kind of thing much easier. i might bring this forward if you plan to go down this route.
2. Suppose i have class A .. Map getFooMap() void addFoo(B foo)
Can i map A into <a> <foo name="name1" value="value1"/> <foo name="name2" value="value2"/> <foo name="name3" value="value3"/> </a> not in <a> <entry> <key>name1</key> <value>value1</value> </entry> .... </a>
(at the moment) betwixt always outputs map entries using the following format:
<entry>
<key>xxx</key>
<value>yyy</value>
<entry>where xxx is the betwixt mapping of the key object and yyy the mapping of the value object.
i can see that:
<foo name="name1" value="value1"/> <foo name="name2" value="value2"/> <foo name="name3" value="value3"/>
would be a common pattern for String valued maps. if this is the case for you, then i might be able to come up with a way to quickly add this feature to betwixt.
it might be more difficult for object values maps since you'll need appropriate object->value conversion. it would make round tripping complex since you'd need a string -> object factory. it's not impossible but it'd need some thinking about. i'd be interested to hear other people views on this.
- robert
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
