On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 04:29, Berin Loritsch wrote: > I believe that the ComponentVerifier would be even more useful if you > gave it a Type object, and a Class object and let the thing do its > verifications from there. > > That way we don't have to repeat that logic in several places.
It was like that originally but got separated out. The reason is when the components are dynamically assembled (like from a Remote soap service) the ComponentVerifier will fail them but the MetaDataVerifier will pass them. -- Cheers, Peter Donald *------------------------------------------------------* | "Common sense is the collection of prejudices | | acquired by age 18. " -Albert Einstein | *------------------------------------------------------* -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
