> > p.s. I don't know whether PGML is considered part of the Diagram > > subsystem or not, but it's certainly part of GEF and it definitely > > doesn't have anything to do with a view. > I've never really been happy that this is part of GEF. My > line to GEF developers has always been that they should > provide their own persistence mechanism for their own app.
I don't think it's bad for GEF to provide a default persistance mechanism for clients as long as it's use is not mandated. > Do we want the OCL template readers and PGML parsers moved > entirely into ArgoUML? > > The argouml critics also uses the OCL template readers in > GEF. It's always annoyed me that the critics should rely on > GEF in this way. Having the critics depend on GEF to get OCL functionality seems very weird and wrong. Why don't we just use the TU Dresdent package directly? If there are some convenience functions implemented by GEF, then yes, I think we should move those into ArgoUML's OCL package. PGML doesn't seem worth worrying too much about at this point since hopefully it will be going away soon. Having it packaged separately from GEF drawing stuff would be useful if it's not too much work so we could easily expose the difference between Persistence->GEF/PGML dependencies and Diagram->GEF/Drawing dependencies. Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
