On Apr 2, 2005, at 2:35 PM, Wes Biggs wrote:
Now, if we had a way to delineate exactly what types are defined as mappable for a field, it might be reasonable for the ORM part of the TCK to exercise these types (or one of them). Beyond that I don't think this should be part of the TCK.
I think that we should delineate what types *must be* defined as mappable, but we should not limit additional types. To put this a bit more explicitly, an implementation that can store a field of a type not explicitly mentioned in the spec should not be out of compliance.
-Patrick
-- Patrick Linskey SolarMetric Inc.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
