On 7/7/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > An alternative would be to have your form class extend > your value object class. However, this approach doesn't > work for me. My form class fields are always Strings > (because of HTTP), while my value object fields are > whatever types make sense (such as Date). I always have > value object classes that look very similar to my forms, > but the types vary. It doesn't bother me.
What is the point of having strong typed VOs? They are neither BOs (no behavior), nor actionforms. Why not to use BOs directly? Someone is going to check for business rules, why not to do it while data is still on web layer? Can save on call to backend. It seem to be a religious argument, and different approaches are good for different situations, but *generally* I would think that using BOs directly is easier and faster. One can say that app can evolve. BOs can evolve one way, and UI another way. Well, then create another BO instead of creating another VO. What is the difference? I will have several BOs working with more or less same data. How bad is that? Oh, right, I have to update web layer. As if one does not have to update web layer, when one modifies VOs. Ultimately all goes to database anyway. Michael. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
