Why not simply expose Transfer in your service layer. If you think of your transfer objects as business objects first and foremost, which they are, then I don't see any problem. I believe it's perfectly acceptable to expose a Factory such as Transfer within your service layer when using such an architecture.
> The only thing that get's a little messy, in my implementation, is the > fact that I have my application set up with MG and CS and so I have > the view, controllers, services, and then gateways/dao's. Instead of > exposing Transfer to the service level and using it to replace all my > gateway/dao functionality, I expose Transfer at the gateway/dao level > as more of a wrapper. Change the ORM, change the gateways/daos > instead of the entire service layer. You might be able to imagine how > this kind of creates some goofiness as I have to have a method in the > gateway that creates the empty Transfer object for me. It works, but > I'm not entirely happy with it at the moment. > > -- Nando M. Breiter The CarbonZero Project CP 234 6934 Bioggio Switzerland +41 76 303 4477 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Before posting questions to the group please read: http://groups.google.com/group/transfer-dev/web/how-to-ask-support-questions-on-transfer You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transfer-dev" 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/transfer-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
