Peter Donald wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been playing with the idea of having Services as first class metadata
> objects. By this I mean it would be possible to load a ServiceInfo class. ie
> You could load both ComponentInfo and ServiceInfo objects. The ServiceInfo
> objects would contain metadata specific to the object.
>
> The advantages of this is that you associate metadata with a service
> independent of an implementation. So this would allow you to indicate that
> all implementations of this service are pass-by-value objects or support
> soap/altrmi bindings. It would also allow us to generate webpages for each
> service aswell as each component.
Hmmm... are not services simply Objects?
If I use an existing service with no metadata, I loose the ability to
specify this?
> Secondly, what do you think of having metadata about individual features in a
> service (ie methods/propertys). If we were to do that then we could pretty
> much model any of the various component systems out there. It would also get
> rid of a bunch of "extra" descriptors (like the mxinfo stuff in phoenix).
> However it adds a massive amount of overhead - what doyou think?
Hmmm... I don't get the immediate value of repeating the method names
somewhere else... hmmm...
example?
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
