>> > The Java 5 option is way better :-) > > I asked previously, but perhaps it was lost, about renaming > AttributeType.getName() to AttributeType.name(). Perhaps it is a stupid > idea, I just like representing derived quantities without java bean > naming conventions...
I like the convention too but in this case by using it would we not be breaking java bean conventions? As name is the actual bean property since TypeName wont exist in 2.4. Plus I think that introducing the convention into a set of interfaces that do not currently use it will just be more confusing for users... so I decided to go with the getter route... Regardless... I am less concerned as this entire class will be deprecated come 2.5 > > Thanks for presenting the options so clearly Justin. > Jody > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express > Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take > control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. > http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ > _______________________________________________ > Geotools-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel > > !DSPAM:4007,468ae7fe59202458217002! > -- Justin Deoliveira The Open Planning Project http://topp.openplans.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
