Thomas Dudziak wrote:

I bumped into some strange thing  in ojb xdoclet:
I need mapping wich gave me Armin: interface descriptor has field
descriptors but doesn't have table attribute
class descriptor has both the same field descriptors and table attribute

but if I specify *generate-table-info="true" in interface descriptor
*xdoclet generates field descriptors and table attribute too



Thats by design. You could use factory-class/factory-method to hide the implementation class from OJB and thus 'instantiate' the interface as far as OJB is concerned.



if I specify *generate-table-info="false" in interface descriptor
*xdoclet doesn't generate table attribute but it doesnt generate field
descriptors too



Again by design: the interface is only used to establish inheritance relationships. The class/interface must be mapped to a table in order to be able to use field/reference/collection descriptors.

Btw, I think Armin forgot the table attribute in the class descriptor
in the mapping he gave you.

Tom


;(
no he doesn't forget - I checked in repository_junit_reference.xml file
what do you mean in "by design" if dtd allow specifing class descriptor that isn't mapped to table (attribute "table" is omitted) with field descriptors ?
the fact is that this mapping is only approach wich is right in my case


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to