From the way other APIs are written, attributes imply support for serializable objects while properties implies just Strings. That's why I suggested get/setAttribute.
This is also another reason to add this because you couldn't stick serializable objects in MimeMessage headers like you could properties. -- Serge Knystautas Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites http://www.lokitech.com Noel J. Bergman wrote: >>>I can't see how the matcher can pass info related to the match >>>to a mailet, other than by adding headers to the MimeMessage. >> > >>The two (minor) changes I have on tap for the next version of the >>mailet API are adding attributes to Mail objects > > > :-) Thank you, Serge. That's exactly what I had in mind. I presume that > this would be: > > void setAttribute(String, Object) > Object getAttribute(String) > > or something similar? The only coupling between Matchers and Mailets would > be the name (and content) of the properties (I don't care if we use > set/getAttribute or set/getProperty ... anyone else care?). > > --- Noel > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
