In theory it would probably be pretty easy for Mark to allow an option to specify a generic Decorator at the root level that would be applied to any objects that don't have a decorator explicitly defined. Personally it sounds like a questionable idea, because in my experience, every object has it's own Decorator that extends a base Decorator (as others have mentioned). I can't really imagine a use for a Decorator that would be applied generically to a large number of objects. Or, more specifically, I can't imagine a case where one would use this and not rapidly run into a brick wall and switch to individual decorators.
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Matt Graf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't think I am explaining myself very well lets see if I can > explain it a little better > > Here is an example of where I tell transfer to use my decorator > <object name="widget_one" table="widget_one" > decorator="model.decorators.widget_one"> > > now what I want is for transfer to use my base decorator without > telling transfer to do so. > > is that possible? > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
