Hi Marcus,
Marcus Roth wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I ported the Image to a FieldContainer. The reason for the dynamic field
> approach for attributes
> is that an image should hold additional attributes for special image
> types.
Especially the volumetric file formats contain a lot of additional
information.
> Number and type of
> this attrubutes depend on the image type. I don't like the dynamic
> fields. They are not supported by
> clustering.
They should be.
> File path should be a field and name should be a NameAttachment. I would
> store always the absolute
> path in the filePath field because it is difficult to define a relative
> path if the image is shared.
With the more generic data providers being discussed I don't think it
will be possible to define an absolute name. Originally I didn't want to
have a name in the Image as not all Images come from files. In practice
99% of Images do come from files, so I'm fine with having the name that
is used to load the image inside the Image and other info as
attachments. To get around the DynamicAttachments we might just use a
generic StringAttachment and use a bunch of them.
Comments?
Dirk
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Opensg-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users
