OK, I see your point.
So I think we need to differentiate *class metadata* and *component
metadata*.
IMHO, as long as components are concerned, XML descriptors are fine and CLR
metadata would not add anything. But, if we speak more about, at a "lower"
level, class metadata, I agree that this is a really nice feature! Let's
hope this will be added later ;)
Cheers,
Sacha
> Sorry, brain shortcut.
>
> What I meant is that the CLR supports meta attributes at the
> bytecode level, so
> you can specify metadata directly in your source file. Even
> better, you can
> query your own metadata and it is available in the language your
> are using. If
> we had that, we could probably get rid of all XML deployment descriptors
> altogether and specify everything in the source file (a la EJBGen).
>
> Of course, this approach doesn't work if you intend to deploy the
> same Java
> classes as different EJB's, but you could simply consider having these
> attributes in a separate Java file anyway. You could still
> access all your
> metadata directly in Java at runtime (as opposed to the current
> state of affair
> wher you have to either parse an XML file or parse your own
> source file, looking
> for Javadoc tags).
>
> --
> Cedric
>
>
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
