Hello, IMHO, there's a difference between DTOs and Value Objects.
When I use the term Value Object, I mean an immutable object, such as a String, a Date, a Money, ....those things who are best designed as immutable if you want to take it easy with the sharing problems ... When I use the term DTO, it does'nt necessarily imply that it's an immutable object, it's a holder of the values of a Business Object (or a flat representation of a short hierarchy of Business Objects => a coarse grained object), and it still has getters and setters because it navigates between two adjacent layers. So for me the major difference is immutabiliy / mutability. My 0.02 EUR, -- Laurent ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rahul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 9:45 PM Subject: Re: DTO vs. JVT > Hi Dan, > Have a look at the following article. > > http://javaoneonline.mentorware.net/servlet/mware.servlets.StudentServlet?mt=1055755038320&mwaction=generic&subsysid=2000&file=dan_malks > > IMHO , the Transfer Objects "live" and "operate" in Business tier and View > Helper objects in Presentation Tier. My understanding is that they both are > value objects, unless someone can elaborate on any differences between the > two(which would be great !). > > and I stick to using pattern names from the ones listed in Design Patterns > and Core J2EE patterns catalogue . > > :-) > ~rahul > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dan Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 6:29 AM > Subject: Re: DTO vs. JVT > > > > > > Hookom, Jacob ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > > > I read the article also and it seemed like old news.... DTO, BO, JVT, > POJO, > > > etc they are all the same to me :) > > > > It sure would be nice if someone could pick one name and stick with > > it. It definitely seemed like old news, which is why I just had to > > ask because it sure didn't sound like anything new. What it did > > reiterate though is that the term Value Object should be dropped > > when speaking of the state of a persisted entity. It seems like > > there is a consensus that those are quite different from DTOs. > > > > Dan > > > > -- > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Daniel Allen, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > http://www.mojavelinux.com/ > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > ...but once you've traveled this far off the track > > You won't settle for less and there's no going back > > --Patrick O'Leary "Far Off the Track" > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
