Hi, What I menetion here is only from the perspective of the 'future' plan for this.
From what I understand of the assembly model, I am not so comfortable about
adding 'promotedAs'. There are probably two options that I can think of which is 1) add the Composite Reference name to the 'tagets' list of the component reference or 2) maintain a map in CompositeUtil with ComponentReference->PromotedReference relationship just to be used in the 'wire' method. Thanks - Venkat On 4/13/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Simon Laws wrote: > On 4/13/07, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> With the current assembly model, how can we tell if a component >> reference >> is >> promoted by a comosite reference? I can get all the promoted references >> from >> CompositeReference but not the other way. >> >> Thanks, >> Raymond >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> If the model is a true reflection of what appears in the SCDL then I > assume you would have to loop over all the references in the composite > that > contains the component in question and test if the componet reference is > being promoted. I know that isn't telling you anything you don't already > know but it's just and excuse to add a related question to this thread > > Is the philosophy with the assembly model to have it represent precisely > what appears in the SCDL or is there room to include value add, for > example, > links from components references to the composite references that promote > them? > > Simon > We currently have: CompositeReference.promotedReferences --> 0..n ComponentReference. We could have the relationship in the other direction: ComponentReference.promotedAs --> 0..n CompositeReference. In the future, I would prefer to have only one of the two above relationships (to avoid confusion with which one needs to be populated when you read or construct model instances), but maybe we can add the second relationship for now and populate it in CompositeUtil.wire(). Would that help? -- Jean-Sebastien --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
