gt; >> a look).
> >>
> >> (sorry it's been so long.)
> >>
> >> - robert
> >>
> >> On Tuesday, November 19, 2002, at 10:55 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> -Ursprüngli
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Gesendet: Montag, 18. November 2002 22:53
An: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Betreff: Re: AW: [Betwixt] XMLBeanInfo customization
On Monday, November 18, 2002, at 08:41 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<%--- snip ---%>
For handling XMLBeanInfos i guess a pluggabl
]
Gesendet: Montag, 18. November 2002 22:53
An: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Betreff: Re: AW: [Betwixt] XMLBeanInfo customization
On Monday, November 18, 2002, at 08:41 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<%--- snip ---%>
For handling XMLBeanInfos i guess a pluggable mechanism
could b
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: robert burrell donkin
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Gesendet: Montag, 18. November 2002 22:53
> An: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Betreff: Re: AW: [Betwixt] XMLBeanInfo customization
>
>
> On Monday, November 18, 2
On Monday, November 18, 2002, at 08:41 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<%--- snip ---%>
For handling XMLBeanInfos i guess a pluggable mechanism
could be the right
way, since there are different opinions about how and where to store
XMLBeanInfos.
IMHO these are solutions to different problems.
<%--- snip ---%>
> > Is there a reason for keeping the XMLBeanInfos inside the
> Introspector. I
> > would prefer something like an XMLBeanInfoRegistry class,
> which keeps the
> > instances. This would make it easier to provide
> XMLBeanInfo, which might
> > me
> > generated on the fly withou
ns Developers List
Betreff: Re: [Betwixt] XMLBeanInfo customization
From: "robert burrell donkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Saturday, November 16, 2002, at 02:08 PM, Martin van den
Bemt wrote:
since XMLBeanInfo's were supposed to correspond to
java.beans.BeanInfo.
BeanInfo su
On Sunday, November 17, 2002, at 09:36 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
From: "robert burrell donkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Saturday, November 16, 2002, at 02:08 PM, Martin van den Bemt wrote:
since XMLBeanInfo's were supposed to correspond to
java.beans.BeanInfo.
BeanInfo supports programmatic
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 17. November 2002 22:37
> An: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Betreff: Re: [Betwixt] XMLBeanInfo customization
>
>
> From: "robert burrell donkin" <[EMAIL PRO
> since XMLBeanInfo's were supposed to correspond to java.beans.BeanInfo.
> BeanInfo supports programmatic implementations. so if you had something
> like xxx.yyy.zzz.FooBean then betwixt might look for a
> xxx.yyy.zzz.FooBeanXMLBeanInfo class which would be a programmatic
> XMLBeanInfo.
>
>
I can support you enabling this feature in Betwixt.
- Harald
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: robert burrell donkin
> [mailto:robertburrelldonkin@;blueyonder.co.uk]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 14. November 2002 19:38
> An: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Betreff: [Be
On Tuesday, November 12, 2002, at 06:45 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Robert,
hi Harald
But anyway I would like to use Betwixt in a more flexible way (e.g. having
own XMLBeanInfos for some Beans).
But on the other hand, if you are interested in making the way beans are
written and re
12 matches
Mail list logo
