This change is definitely an improvement -- I just submitted it and re-posted the docs (http://people.apache.org/~tvolkert/doc/pivot/wtkx/Bindable.html).
I would have liked to be able to make the "fieldName" property optional, but since we can't be guaranteed of the order in which the fields are returned to us, it's just something we have to live with. -T On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Todd Volkert <[email protected]> wrote: >> Arguably, the @Bind "property" could be changed to "fieldName", since that >> is technically more accurate. Similarly, the "name" in @Load could be >> changed to "resourceName", since it translates to a call to getResource(), >> which takes a "name" argument. > > I agree > >> These changes would make the "name" in @Bind a bit confusing; since "id" >> seems more appropriate anyways, we could change it and also change >> getObjectByName() to getObjectByID(). The implication of this change is that >> now an ID could either be relative or fully-qualified (i.e. containing >> dot-separated namespaces). > > Right now, the name in getObjectByName() can be either relative or > fully qualified, so there's no real change here. I agree that > getObjectByID would be more intuitive to WTKX users. >
