This is a good compromise IMHO.
Jeremy D. Branham Tel: **DOTNET -----Original Message----- From: Dan Haywood [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2015 7:27 AM To: users Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: ISIS-970 ... (new annotations) please review if you get a chance... On 3 January 2015 at 13:14, Jeroen van der Wal <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have one more thought: since @ViewModel and > @DomainObject(nature=UI_VIEW) are the same concepts it might be more > intuitive to use > @DomainObject(nature=VIEW_MODEL) > > Yes, that probably does make sense; we are just providing two equivalent syntaxes for describing a (UI) view model. So the revised proposal is: for the UI/app layer, retain/introduce: * @ViewModel * @ViewModelLayout for the domain layer: * @DomainObject(nature=JDO_ENTITY | EXTERNAL_ENTITY | VIEW_MODEL) * @DomainObjectLayout for both: * @Property(domainEvent=..., ) and @PropertyLayout * @Collection(domainEvent=..., ) and @CollectionLayout * @Action(domainEvent=..., ) and @ActionLayout * @Parameter and @ParameterLayout where @ViewModel and @DomainObject(nature=VIEW_MODEL) are basically equivalent; choose whichever notation you prefer (and use a metamodel validator to exclude the other). thx Dan ________________________________ This e-mail may contain Sprint proprietary information intended for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies of the message.
