On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Rickard Öberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Same type, but their instance characteristics are very > different. My guess is that many systems is like this, that you have an > "active set" and one "not-so-active" set of "archived" objects. Ok, I buy that... >> Perhaps there is use-cases, but we are then looking at a "Cache >> Aspect" of an Entity and my question would then be; What other aspects >> are there? And wouldn't that lead to a more generic approach, instead >> of "hard coded" onto the Entity type? > > I should clarify that MaxAge and Expires values should be Entity > Properties, but not necessarily specified on the Entity interface, i.e. > they could be specified in a Caching mixin type interface so one can > choose when to have it and when not to have it. It is entirely possible > to do the same with LastModified and Version too, of course, but it > might be nice to be able to rely on them being there all the time. Ok, so if "Caching" is indeed an optional Mixin type made available from lib-caching, then I am totally in favour. Version and Last-Modified sounds too rudimentary, so making the part of the Entity interface is probably a good idea. So, from my side; Go ahead. Cheers Niclas _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
