Hi,
I just looked through the company model and noted that the concrete classes
now have some fields marked with field-type in the XML (e.g
Company.address). Why? The field has its own type so there is no need to
specify that. It is typically for use where a field is an interface and so to
Done.
Thanks,
Craig
P.S. You are welcome to commit these changes yourself...
On Jul 27, 2007, at 8:30 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote:
Hi Craig,
Looking briefly, it looks like the only cases are for the embedded
Address field. Is this what you are referring to?
That's the one I spotted and
Hi Andy,
On Jul 27, 2007, at 4:25 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote:
Hi,
I just looked through the company model and noted that the concrete
classes
now have some fields marked with field-type in the XML (e.g
Company.address). Why? The field has its own type so there is no
need to
specify that.
Hi Craig,
Looking briefly, it looks like the only cases are for the embedded
Address field. Is this what you are referring to?
That's the one I spotted and didn't look further.
PS. api2 seems to be missing a couple of files being checked in for a
working build
Hi Craig,
Michelle volunteered to take a look. I think setting the field-type is
not necessary, because the declared Java type is Address, a PC class and
not an interface. It is ok to specify the field-type, but it might be
confusing since it is not necessary. So I propose to remove it.
To your field-type issue, I'll take a look at this later. Do you
think it's causing issues?
Craig
On Jul 27, 2007, at 8:30 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote:
Hi Craig,
Looking briefly, it looks like the only cases are for the embedded
Address field. Is this what you are referring to?
That's the
Hi,
On Jul 27, 2007, at 9:10 AM, Michael Bouschen wrote:
Hi Craig,
Michelle volunteered to take a look.
Thanks for that.
I think setting the field-type is not necessary, because the
declared Java type is Address, a PC class and not an interface. It
is ok to specify the field-type, but
