Abe, Your explanation in your reply was much clearer (IMHO) than the current documentation. I will take a stab at improving the wording so that the meaning and differences are more pronounced. I will also link the two sections of the document. Thanks.
One clarification... Using Magazine and Article from the doc's example, if a field (Article) is marked as @Dependent and the owning object (Magazine) is deleted, then cascading this delete operation down to the Article object is the same as specifying cascade=REMOVE (or ALL) on the relationship annotation. Correct? It seems that the added benefit of the @Dependent family of annotations is to aid with the orphan object deletion when the Article field is just nulled out. Thanks, Kevin On 3/8/07, Abe White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks, Abe. This explanation helps a great deal. Should we > update the > documentation with some of this information? As far as I can tell the documentation on cascade=DELETE and the documentation on the Dependent metadata extension already contains everything I said. Feel free to change it, though. _______________________________________________________________________ Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
