Mike Mazur wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the feedback... > > On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 15:15:38 +0000 > Justin Clark-Casey <jjusti...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Mike Mazur wrote: >>> So instead of having: >>> >>> AssetBase ab = new AssetBase(); >>> ab.Name = "some name"; >>> ab.Description = "some description"; >>> >>> I would write: >>> >>> AssetBase ab = new AssetBase(); >>> ab.Metadata.Name = "some name"; >>> ab.Metadata.Description = "some description"; >>> >> Just to clarify, you're anticipating changing the >> OpenSim.Framework.AssetBase class (instead of having a parallel class >> in the AssetServer code)? If so, sounds good to me. > > Yes, I'd like to modify OpenSim.Framework.AssetBase. > >>> Should the Metadata class be renamed to AssetMetadata? Any other >>> thoughts? >> From a readability perspective I would rather see it remain as just >> Metadata, since something like >> >> AssetBase myAsset = new AssetBase(); >> myAsset.AssetMetadata.Name = "Heloooo"; >> >> looks kind of redundant to me (though this may just be a taste issue). > > Yeah, that seems redundant, although since the class lives in > OpenSim.Framework, and not something more specific (like > OpenSim.Framework.Assets, for example), the OpenSim.Framework.Metadata > class would be pretty ambiguous; what is the Metadata for? > > For the time being I'll go ahead with OpenSim.Framework.Metadata.
It's fine for the object to be called AssetMetaData, just don't make the
property that.
We don't have UserProfile.StringFirstname. The type is encoded already
in the object, don't encode it also in the name.
-Sean
--
Sean Dague / Neas Bade
sda...@gmail.com
http://dague.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
