> > I don't speak for the _RI_ of JAXB but it was really helpful to change
> > the mapping schema and let the
> > according beans are generated automatically. This definetly saved me
> > many hours because
> > I had 3 or 4 major structural changes and of course many small ones.
> >
> > I wouldn't vote +1 for a JAXB implementation in general but I definitely
> > vote +1 for a stable library
> > supporting XML binding.
> >
> > What I don't like about JAXB 1.0 is that one cannot add interface
> > statements to the generated
> > beans. This would make the persistance strategy of the mapping model
> > more exchangeable and maybe
> > it would make some adapter classes easier.

Could we sum this up to have some more clarity? Currently I would like
to get involved more but I am not sure what is being worked on.

oliver

Reply via email to