RE: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
Hi agree with Nick, Part of my motivation is to remove the need to compile and ship separate generated ClassDescriptor's when using SourceGenerated classes with Castor XML. Infact as each ClassDescriptor contains an anonymous inner class for each field the number of classes runs into thousands for us. Often meaning we have to allocate lots of memory to the class heap as a result. So parallel files (be they .java or .xml) do have an overhead, be it maintenance or in the above case class footprint. Using annotations simply brings two definitions together. I also agree that if you want different runtime behaviour annotations are not suitable. Andy. -Original Message- From: Nick Stuart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 15 July 2005 13:21 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations? I do the same thing Gregory. I have a couple of objects that use several mapping files, and annotations would not be able to help with this case, at least in no way that I can tell. I was never starting this little project with the idea of getting rid of the XML files, but to add some convenience where we could. -Nick On 7/15/05, Jeremy Haile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The introduction of annotation-support in Castor would not break any > support of using mapping XML files. Annotations are merely a > convenience that allow you to attach meta-data to your code that > describes how to map classes to XML files - they are one alternative for > mapping classes to XML; the mapping XML files are another alternative. > > The way Keith described adding annotations support is in the > introspection code that examines classes to determine how to map them. > This is already an alternative to mapping files and would simply be > enhanced to support annotations (JAXB?). > > There are definitely situations where it is undesirable to have the > mappings embedded in your source code, and you present a good example. > > > > > On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:47:44 +0100, "Gregory Block" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Just as a sidenote: > > > > We routinely take object trees from our DAO layer and render them, > > using different mapping files, to different feeds and different feed > > versions based on customer config and the actual feed being provided. > > > > I would *not* be amenable to any fundamental change that broke > > Castor's ability to perform arbitrary, non-hardcoded XML generation; > > this is one of our strong points, IMO - the ability to determine, on > > the fly, an appropriate XML representation in code and serialise to > > that representation, rather than one imposed by the developer at > > class generation time, rather than force a lot of unwanted content > > through an XSL transform just to receive a minimal subset of data. > > > > On 13 Jul 2005, at 14:16, Jeremy Haile wrote: > > > > > It sounds like your annotations are used to generate a Castor mapping > > > XML file. JAXB actually works by reading the annotations at runtime - > > > meaning that no XML file would be required at all. This would require > > > Castor to be modified to support reading the annotations at runtime > > > rather than reading the XML mapping file. In fact, perhaps the Castor > > > introspection code could simply be modified to recognize the > > > annotations > > > when figuring out how to map "unmapped" classes. > > > > > > - > > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please > > send an empty message to the following address: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - > > > > - > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please > send an empty message to the following address: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - > > - If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It may not be disclosed to, or used by, anyone other than the addressee. If you receive this message in error, please advise us immediately. Internet emails are not necessarily secure. CODA does not accept responsibility for changes to any email which occur after the email has been sent. Attachments to this email may contain software viruses, which could damage your systems. CODA has checked the attachments for viruses before sending, but you should virus-check them before opening. - If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
I do the same thing Gregory. I have a couple of objects that use several mapping files, and annotations would not be able to help with this case, at least in no way that I can tell. I was never starting this little project with the idea of getting rid of the XML files, but to add some convenience where we could. -Nick On 7/15/05, Jeremy Haile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The introduction of annotation-support in Castor would not break any > support of using mapping XML files. Annotations are merely a > convenience that allow you to attach meta-data to your code that > describes how to map classes to XML files - they are one alternative for > mapping classes to XML; the mapping XML files are another alternative. > > The way Keith described adding annotations support is in the > introspection code that examines classes to determine how to map them. > This is already an alternative to mapping files and would simply be > enhanced to support annotations (JAXB?). > > There are definitely situations where it is undesirable to have the > mappings embedded in your source code, and you present a good example. > > > > > On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:47:44 +0100, "Gregory Block" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Just as a sidenote: > > > > We routinely take object trees from our DAO layer and render them, > > using different mapping files, to different feeds and different feed > > versions based on customer config and the actual feed being provided. > > > > I would *not* be amenable to any fundamental change that broke > > Castor's ability to perform arbitrary, non-hardcoded XML generation; > > this is one of our strong points, IMO - the ability to determine, on > > the fly, an appropriate XML representation in code and serialise to > > that representation, rather than one imposed by the developer at > > class generation time, rather than force a lot of unwanted content > > through an XSL transform just to receive a minimal subset of data. > > > > On 13 Jul 2005, at 14:16, Jeremy Haile wrote: > > > > > It sounds like your annotations are used to generate a Castor mapping > > > XML file. JAXB actually works by reading the annotations at runtime - > > > meaning that no XML file would be required at all. This would require > > > Castor to be modified to support reading the annotations at runtime > > > rather than reading the XML mapping file. In fact, perhaps the Castor > > > introspection code could simply be modified to recognize the > > > annotations > > > when figuring out how to map "unmapped" classes. > > > > > > - > > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please > > send an empty message to the following address: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - > > > > - > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please > send an empty message to the following address: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - > > - If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
The introduction of annotation-support in Castor would not break any support of using mapping XML files. Annotations are merely a convenience that allow you to attach meta-data to your code that describes how to map classes to XML files - they are one alternative for mapping classes to XML; the mapping XML files are another alternative. The way Keith described adding annotations support is in the introspection code that examines classes to determine how to map them. This is already an alternative to mapping files and would simply be enhanced to support annotations (JAXB?). There are definitely situations where it is undesirable to have the mappings embedded in your source code, and you present a good example. On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:47:44 +0100, "Gregory Block" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Just as a sidenote: > > We routinely take object trees from our DAO layer and render them, > using different mapping files, to different feeds and different feed > versions based on customer config and the actual feed being provided. > > I would *not* be amenable to any fundamental change that broke > Castor's ability to perform arbitrary, non-hardcoded XML generation; > this is one of our strong points, IMO - the ability to determine, on > the fly, an appropriate XML representation in code and serialise to > that representation, rather than one imposed by the developer at > class generation time, rather than force a lot of unwanted content > through an XSL transform just to receive a minimal subset of data. > > On 13 Jul 2005, at 14:16, Jeremy Haile wrote: > > > It sounds like your annotations are used to generate a Castor mapping > > XML file. JAXB actually works by reading the annotations at runtime - > > meaning that no XML file would be required at all. This would require > > Castor to be modified to support reading the annotations at runtime > > rather than reading the XML mapping file. In fact, perhaps the Castor > > introspection code could simply be modified to recognize the > > annotations > > when figuring out how to map "unmapped" classes. > > > - > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please > send an empty message to the following address: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - > - If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
Just as a sidenote: We routinely take object trees from our DAO layer and render them, using different mapping files, to different feeds and different feed versions based on customer config and the actual feed being provided. I would *not* be amenable to any fundamental change that broke Castor's ability to perform arbitrary, non-hardcoded XML generation; this is one of our strong points, IMO - the ability to determine, on the fly, an appropriate XML representation in code and serialise to that representation, rather than one imposed by the developer at class generation time, rather than force a lot of unwanted content through an XSL transform just to receive a minimal subset of data. On 13 Jul 2005, at 14:16, Jeremy Haile wrote: It sounds like your annotations are used to generate a Castor mapping XML file. JAXB actually works by reading the annotations at runtime - meaning that no XML file would be required at all. This would require Castor to be modified to support reading the annotations at runtime rather than reading the XML mapping file. In fact, perhaps the Castor introspection code could simply be modified to recognize the annotations when figuring out how to map "unmapped" classes. - If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
Jeremy Haile wrote: It sounds like your annotations are used to generate a Castor mapping XML file. JAXB actually works by reading the annotations at runtime - meaning that no XML file would be required at all. This would require Castor to be modified to support reading the annotations at runtime rather than reading the XML mapping file. In fact, perhaps the Castor introspection code could simply be modified to recognize the annotations when figuring out how to map "unmapped" classes. That seems like a good approach...it shouldn't be too hard to modify the introspector for this purpose, actually it might be good to design a simple plugin API for the introspector and then it as a plugin. The annotations used by JAXB have a one-to-one mapping to the mappings provided by Castor for the most part, with only a few additions (which I really like) For example, JAXB allows you to do something like the following: I believe the only way this can be represented in Castor (correct me if I'm wrong) is: Castor supports both examples. For the first example you just need to use auto-naming="deriveByClass" on the bind-xml element and make the collection a first-class object by using container="false". Something like the following should do the trick: --Keith - If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
I was actually just thinking about that Jeremy. The way I generate the
files right now is by reproducing all the classes from the XSD file
and simply marshalling them out. In any case, all the info and
structure is there, it should not be that hard to get Castor to
generate the information on the fly.
And, for the actual JDO instance, that is now (I believe), already
completly buildable through code as is, so it would be a matter of
supplying the information for that somewhere.
-Nick
On 7/13/05, Jeremy Haile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It sounds like your annotations are used to generate a Castor mapping
> XML file. JAXB actually works by reading the annotations at runtime -
> meaning that no XML file would be required at all. This would require
> Castor to be modified to support reading the annotations at runtime
> rather than reading the XML mapping file. In fact, perhaps the Castor
> introspection code could simply be modified to recognize the annotations
> when figuring out how to map "unmapped" classes.
>
> The annotations used by JAXB have a one-to-one mapping to the mappings
> provided by Castor for the most part, with only a few additions (which I
> really like) For example, JAXB allows you to do something like the
> following:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I believe the only way this can be represented in Castor (correct me if
> I'm wrong) is:
>
>
>
>
>
> Obviously, the first example is much easier to read. And JAXB supports
> mapping these type of mappings using annotations. (JAXB also supports
> the second example as well)
>
> Jeremy
>
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 23:23:19 -0400, "Nick Stuart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> > No sorry, should have been more specific. I simply mean that the
> > annotations are used to generate the mapping XML files. I dont have
> > any experince/knowledge with JAXB and what it involves, although I
> > think I'll read up on it tomorrow. :)
> >
> > The project is currently waiting for approval on java.net, and would
> > be more then happy to expand its goal and purpose. Everythings got to
> > start somewhere.
> >
> > -Nick
> >
> > p.s. Why is castor no where to be found on the front page of code
> > haus? Found this really odd when I went looking for it there for some
> > reason.
> >
> > On 7/12/05, Bruce Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 7/11/05, Nick Stuart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have been meaning to set it up somewhere, but just haven't yet. Its
> > > > basically a straight translation from the xml spec (used Castors own
> > > > code generation to generate the classes from the descriptors and to
> > > > write back out to the xml). I've also written a quick and dirty ant
> > > > task to help with this as well. It's been working on a very small app
> > > > I've been working on, but no promises. :)
> > >
> > > By XML spec, do you mean the JAXB 2.0 spec? If so, having this in
> > > Castor would be fantastic!
> > >
> > > Bruce
> > > --
> > > perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL
> > > PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E > > );'
> > >
> > > The Castor Project
> > > http://www.castor.org/
> > >
> > > Apache Geronimo
> > > http://geronimo.apache.org/
> > >
> >
> > -
> > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
> > send an empty message to the following address:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > -
> >
>
> -
> If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
> send an empty message to the following address:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -
>
>
-
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
send an empty message to the following address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
Ok, just so I'm understanding the spec from the quick read I've done
of it so far. JAXB is basically just another way to bind Java classes
to XML, much like Castor. If one were to implement JAXB it would
involve having complete API level support for the spec, which in
castors case would be like 're-doing', or at least heaviy modifying
existing code to meet the specs and behave accordingly.
So the fact that JAXB uses generics/annotations really doesn't buy my
current situation a whole lot, but may give some ideas on what to do
with them.
My other understanding is that JAXB doesn't have one XML 'spec' that
they follow, but is a lot like Castor in allowing the use of any
arbitrary descriptor/xml format to be used. I bring this up becuase
I'm confused when you say 'By XML spec, do you mean the JAXB 2.0
spec?'.
Hmm...guess thats it for now, but this could be an intersting project
to get going, and like you said, that is one big spec they got there.
:)
-Nick
On 7/13/05, Bruce Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/12/05, Nick Stuart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > No sorry, should have been more specific. I simply mean that the
> > annotations are used to generate the mapping XML files. I dont have
> > any experince/knowledge with JAXB and what it involves, although I
> > think I'll read up on it tomorrow. :)
>
> Be forwarned, it's a big spec ;-).
>
> > The project is currently waiting for approval on java.net, and would
> > be more then happy to expand its goal and purpose. Everythings got to
> > start somewhere.
>
> I'll have to take a peek when the source is available.
>
> > p.s. Why is castor no where to be found on the front page of code
> > haus? Found this really odd when I went looking for it there for some
> > reason.
>
> The current unofficial project count at the Codehaus is 126 and
> currently only 28 of those are listed on the Codehaus home page. I
> have no idea if there is any policy for getting a project listed
> there, but I'll look into it.
>
> Bruce
> --
> perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E );'
>
> The Castor Project
> http://www.castor.org/
>
> Apache Geronimo
> http://geronimo.apache.org/
>
> -
> If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
> send an empty message to the following address:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -
>
>
-
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
send an empty message to the following address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
It sounds like your annotations are used to generate a Castor mapping
XML file. JAXB actually works by reading the annotations at runtime -
meaning that no XML file would be required at all. This would require
Castor to be modified to support reading the annotations at runtime
rather than reading the XML mapping file. In fact, perhaps the Castor
introspection code could simply be modified to recognize the annotations
when figuring out how to map "unmapped" classes.
The annotations used by JAXB have a one-to-one mapping to the mappings
provided by Castor for the most part, with only a few additions (which I
really like) For example, JAXB allows you to do something like the
following:
I believe the only way this can be represented in Castor (correct me if
I'm wrong) is:
Obviously, the first example is much easier to read. And JAXB supports
mapping these type of mappings using annotations. (JAXB also supports
the second example as well)
Jeremy
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 23:23:19 -0400, "Nick Stuart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> No sorry, should have been more specific. I simply mean that the
> annotations are used to generate the mapping XML files. I dont have
> any experince/knowledge with JAXB and what it involves, although I
> think I'll read up on it tomorrow. :)
>
> The project is currently waiting for approval on java.net, and would
> be more then happy to expand its goal and purpose. Everythings got to
> start somewhere.
>
> -Nick
>
> p.s. Why is castor no where to be found on the front page of code
> haus? Found this really odd when I went looking for it there for some
> reason.
>
> On 7/12/05, Bruce Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/11/05, Nick Stuart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I have been meaning to set it up somewhere, but just haven't yet. Its
> > > basically a straight translation from the xml spec (used Castors own
> > > code generation to generate the classes from the descriptors and to
> > > write back out to the xml). I've also written a quick and dirty ant
> > > task to help with this as well. It's been working on a very small app
> > > I've been working on, but no promises. :)
> >
> > By XML spec, do you mean the JAXB 2.0 spec? If so, having this in
> > Castor would be fantastic!
> >
> > Bruce
> > --
> > perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E > );'
> >
> > The Castor Project
> > http://www.castor.org/
> >
> > Apache Geronimo
> > http://geronimo.apache.org/
> >
>
> -
> If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
> send an empty message to the following address:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -
>
-
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
send an empty message to the following address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
On 7/12/05, Nick Stuart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No sorry, should have been more specific. I simply mean that the
> annotations are used to generate the mapping XML files. I dont have
> any experince/knowledge with JAXB and what it involves, although I
> think I'll read up on it tomorrow. :)
Be forwarned, it's a big spec ;-).
> The project is currently waiting for approval on java.net, and would
> be more then happy to expand its goal and purpose. Everythings got to
> start somewhere.
I'll have to take a peek when the source is available.
> p.s. Why is castor no where to be found on the front page of code
> haus? Found this really odd when I went looking for it there for some
> reason.
The current unofficial project count at the Codehaus is 126 and
currently only 28 of those are listed on the Codehaus home page. I
have no idea if there is any policy for getting a project listed
there, but I'll look into it.
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL
PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61Ehttp://www.castor.org/
Apache Geronimo
http://geronimo.apache.org/
-
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
send an empty message to the following address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
No sorry, should have been more specific. I simply mean that the
annotations are used to generate the mapping XML files. I dont have
any experince/knowledge with JAXB and what it involves, although I
think I'll read up on it tomorrow. :)
The project is currently waiting for approval on java.net, and would
be more then happy to expand its goal and purpose. Everythings got to
start somewhere.
-Nick
p.s. Why is castor no where to be found on the front page of code
haus? Found this really odd when I went looking for it there for some
reason.
On 7/12/05, Bruce Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/11/05, Nick Stuart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I have been meaning to set it up somewhere, but just haven't yet. Its
> > basically a straight translation from the xml spec (used Castors own
> > code generation to generate the classes from the descriptors and to
> > write back out to the xml). I've also written a quick and dirty ant
> > task to help with this as well. It's been working on a very small app
> > I've been working on, but no promises. :)
>
> By XML spec, do you mean the JAXB 2.0 spec? If so, having this in
> Castor would be fantastic!
>
> Bruce
> --
> perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E );'
>
> The Castor Project
> http://www.castor.org/
>
> Apache Geronimo
> http://geronimo.apache.org/
>
-
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
send an empty message to the following address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
On 7/11/05, Nick Stuart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been meaning to set it up somewhere, but just haven't yet. Its
> basically a straight translation from the xml spec (used Castors own
> code generation to generate the classes from the descriptors and to
> write back out to the xml). I've also written a quick and dirty ant
> task to help with this as well. It's been working on a very small app
> I've been working on, but no promises. :)
By XML spec, do you mean the JAXB 2.0 spec? If so, having this in
Castor would be fantastic!
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL
PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61Ehttp://www.castor.org/
Apache Geronimo
http://geronimo.apache.org/
-
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
send an empty message to the following address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
I actually have a 'somewhat' working implementation of this concept. I say somewhat because I haven't been able to test it thouroughly myself or eat my own dog food yet. I have been meaning to set it up somewhere, but just haven't yet. Its basically a straight translation from the xml spec (used Castors own code generation to generate the classes from the descriptors and to write back out to the xml). I've also written a quick and dirty ant task to help with this as well. It's been working on a very small app I've been working on, but no promises. :) Let me see if I can get it setup somewhere for easy access. I'll let out a shout when its up for general consumption. -Nick - If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
Check out JAXB 2.0. It is still in Early Access right now (with a reference implementation), but it makes use of annotations and generics to provide a lot of the same functionality that Castor provides. https://jaxb.dev.java.net/ Actually, I would like to see Castor provide an implementation that is JAXB 2.0 compliant - not precluding a separate interface that provides more functionality. What are the Castor developers current view of the relationship between Castor and JAXB? Jeremy On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:18:33 -0500, "Cumming, Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Hi, I'm new to the list, but I've been using Castor for years, quite > successfully. > > Now that we're making the switch to Java 1.5, it seems to me like it > would be natural to finally give up the mapping files and move to > mappings based on annotations. Are there any proposals for such a > system? Are there any 3rd party / open source implementations of such a > system? > > Thanks, > > Kirk Cumming > > > - > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please > send an empty message to the following address: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - > - If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: [castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
Kirk, as far as I remember, there's a Jira issue that discussed a possible approach towards introducing such a feature. Werner Cumming, Kirk wrote: > Hi, I'm new to the list, but I've been using Castor for years, quite > successfully. > > Now that we're making the switch to Java 1.5, it seems to me like it > would be natural to finally give up the mapping files and move to > mappings based on annotations. Are there any proposals for such a > system? Are there any 3rd party / open source implementations of such a > system? > > Thanks, > > Kirk Cumming > > > - > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please > send an empty message to the following address: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - > > - If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
[castor-dev] [XML] Are there existing systems for mapping via annotations?
Hi, I'm new to the list, but I've been using Castor for years, quite successfully. Now that we're making the switch to Java 1.5, it seems to me like it would be natural to finally give up the mapping files and move to mappings based on annotations. Are there any proposals for such a system? Are there any 3rd party / open source implementations of such a system? Thanks, Kirk Cumming - If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please send an empty message to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
