Refactoring serialization +1 I'm also looking at a refactoring that will make it easy to have the same flexibility in to_json as in to_xml. I probably won't get to it for a week or two at this rate, but if someone beats me to it I won't mind too much...
--josh On May 24, 2007, at 12:01 AM, Michael Koziarski wrote: > > That sounds like a reasonable option. Perhaps something else worth > considering is that overriding the root element for a given model > class is a little hard. Perhaps that's a sign we should be refactoring > the serialization a little? > > On 5/24/07, ara.t.howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> On May 23, 2007, at 5:57 PM, Michael Koziarski wrote: >> >>> >>>> http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/8305 >>>> http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/8308 >>> >>> An XML namespace has to be declared to be valid xml, so the patches >>> submitted seem to leave us in the same situation where .to_xml will >>> produce invalid xml. >>> >>> So given Module::Model, the only options I can think of are >>> <module_model> or <model>? Which is better or worse for your >>> particular situation? >>> >> >> what about '<module-model>' since '-' cannot possible be part of a >> ruby class/module name? it allows for >> >> <module-foo_bar> >> etc. >> >> -a >> -- >> we can deny everything, except that we have the possibility of being >> better. simply reflect on that. >> h.h. the 14th dalai lama >> >> >> >> >>> >> > > > -- > Cheers > > Koz > > > -- Josh Susser http://blog.hasmanythrough.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
