[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Datatype interface extension
That's fine by me. --On 11 September 2001 17:14 -0700 Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI <kohsuke.kawaguchi@eng.sun.com> wrote: > >> Are you saying that the allowed arguments of the isValid() method on the >> Datatype interface depends on the return value of the >> isContextDependent() method on a separate interface? That doesn't seem >> right to me. The Datatype interface should be semantically >> self-contained. I think the isContextDependent() method must be on the >> Datatype interface. This isn't so bad, as it's potentially useful for >> other applications independently of the Datatype compatibility spec. >> The getIdType() can be on a separate CompatibilityDatatype interface. > > Then I think it's OK to have all methods (including getIdType()) on the > Datatype interface. > > Implementing the getIdType() method is easy (just return ID_TYPE_NULL) > and so it's very easy for datatype libraries to support it. > > If they are separate, processors need type checking and casting to call > the getIdType method. I guess less optional features are better. > > > We've added the createStreamingValidator method, which is arguably an > optional feature, into the Datatype interface. So I think it's OK to > treat the getIdType method in a similar way. > > > regards, > -- > Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI +1 650 786 0721 > Sun Microsystems kohsuke.kawaguchi@sun.com > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC