RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data Object vs Value Object

[Ara Abrahamian]

Title: Message

Imho we should use what Floyd uses in his EJB Patterns book.   Ara. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of JD Brennan Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data Object vs Value Object   Thanks.  That makes sense.  Martin Fowler uses the name Data Transfer Object for the Sun pattern Value Object.   Has the Java community settled on the name Value Object, or might the name Data Transfer Object be more appropriate for XDoclet?   I don't really care one way or the other, I'm just trying to stick my finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing.  ;-)   Tx! JD   -----Original Message----- From: Vincent Harcq [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 10:07 PM To: 'JD Brennan'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data Object vs Value Object DO is the same concept as VO. VO will replace DO in the future.  More powerful.   -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of JD Brennan Sent: mercredi 10 avril 2002 2:39 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: [Xdoclet-user] Data Object vs Value Object What's difference between data object and value object in XDoclet? I've found documentation for the Value Object pattern (http://java.sun.com/blueprints/patterns/j2ee_patterns/value_object/index.html) and for the Data Access Object pattern (http://java.sun.com/blueprints/patterns/j2ee_patterns/data_access_object/) But I can't find a definition of the "Data Object" pattern. It seems that in XDoclet the <dao> subtask is different from the <dataobject> subtask, so am I correct in assuming the dao and dataobject don't have anything to do with each other in XDoclet? Thanks for any enlightenment! JD