I would rather do it in the annotations. Internally we often have a internal class without TO and a transfer object that ends in TO. So I think it makes sense to differentiate them on the class level.
Christian On 18.01.2013 09:51, Jan Bernhardt wrote: >> Btw. I would rather name the xml element Entitlement than EntitlementTO >> as the fact that it is a transfer object is not important on the xml level. >> > I agree. Not using *TO ending would look nicer on transport layer. > The question here is, should we also remove "TO" in Classnames, or just set a > name in annotation, e.g. @XMLRootElement(name = "entitlement") ? > >> Christian
