So it seems that if the parent class has no instances, and you store 2 subclasses in the same table (e.g ARTICLE) or if you have all of the subclass properties (including those in ArticleBO.cfc) in separate tables (e.g. JOURNAL_ARTICLE and WEB_ARTICLE, with no ARTICLE table), then you might not want to have an ArticleDAO.cfc.
Correct.
If you chose to implement the persistence with ARTICLE, JOURNAL_ARTICLE, and WEB_ARTICLE tables, where ARTICLE stores the properties in ArticleBO.cfc, would you not want to have an ArticleDAO.cfc to save the data that is specific to the ArticleBO.cfc?
Not necessarily - the ARTICLE table is really just an optimization of how the other types are persisted but it might be convenient to have ArticleDAO.cfc to save duplicating code. Again, the ArticleBO.cfc isn't really a business object - it's an optimization of your model to avoid duplicating (business) code.
Does that sound right?
Given the caveats above, yes.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood
----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email.
CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com).
An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
