Hi Leif,
The cleanest approach for this is probably to define abstract <mapping>
definitions with no name for each of the classes which can be extended.
Use the new type-name="some-name" attribute to give the abstract
mappings names, so that you can define separate mappings for the actual
types which use these abstract mappings. So you'd have:
<mapping abstract="true" type-name="A-type">
...
</mapping>
<mapping class="A" name="A">
<structure map-as="A-type"/>
</mapping>
<mapping abstract="true" type-name="B-type">
<structure map-as="A-type"/>
...
</mapping>
<mapping class="B" name="B">
<structure map-as="B-type"/>
</mapping>
etc. That way you're reusing the structure at each level while only
doing the wrapper element that matches the actual class.
- Dennis
Leif Stainsby wrote:
Hi,
I have read the JiBX documentation (very nice) but the differences
between 'extends' versus 'map-as' is not clear to me. Perhaps someone
could help me with this. What is needed seems fairly straightforward,
and I believe JiBX can handle it, I just can't quite figure out what the
mapping should look like.
What would be the best approach to use for mapping this typical class
hierarchy?
Class-A (base class)
Class-B extends Class-A
Class-C extends Class-B
where none of the classes is abstract (they can all occur individually
in the wild) and where the serialized form of a derived class includes
all the properties (elements, attributes etc.) of the extended classes
but does not include the element names of classes that are extended.
Obviously, some form or re-use of the mappings would be useful. Assume
for now that all properties are simple (i.e. no collections or nested
structures).
I hope this is clear enough, but perhaps an example will help. I would
expect it to serialize an instance of Class-C (something) like this:
<element-C attrA1="" attrB1="" attr-C1="" attr-C2="">
<element-A1/>
<element-A2/>
<element-B1/>
<element-B2/>
<element-C1/>
<element-C2/>
</element-C>
and *not* like this, with wrapping element names from classes higher up
the hierarchy:
<element-C attr-C1="" attr-C2="">
<element-A attrA1="">
<element-A1/>
<element-A2/>
</element-A>
<element-B attrB1="">
<element-B1/>
<element-B2/>
</element-B>
<element-C1/>
<element-C2/>
</element-C>
Are there 'best practices' that cover this issue already written up
somewhere? Many thanks in advance.
...Leif
--------------------------
Leif Stainsby
Galdos Systems Inc.
--------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
jibx-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jibx-users
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
jibx-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jibx-users
