[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/brow...action_12508304 ]

Craig Russell commented on JDO-403:
-----------------------------------

> If the issue here is to justify having columns (plural) in @Field (for use by embe
dded fields) then the example of using an embedded PC with a 1-1 relation to another
 PC which uses a compound PK is ample justification IMHO (never mind the fact that t
his
is how we would have done it in XML via <embedded> ).

I agree that having columns (plural) in @Field is not an issue.

> If the issue is how we should map non-standard types like java.awt.Point then that
 really needs its own JIRA since it affects not just annotations but also XML, and n
ot just embedded fields but also any field of that type in a class (going back to my
 "M
yLine" class earlier in the JIRA - how to specify the persistence of that on
 its own never mind embedded). [A java.awt.Point is not PC and so can't 
have @Field (or <field> ) defining for it without a change to the spec. If we
 are contemplating doing such a
thing then that would have some useful applications in JPOX spatial types pe
rsistence support]

I think there are two different topics here.

1. I agree that if we're discussing how to map types that are not mentioned 
in the spec and not able to be enhanced (java.awt.Point) this is a separate 
issue and we should take it off to another JIRA.

2. I'd like to talk about mapping org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.mylib.PCRect as an e
mbedded field. PCRect includes two PCPoint instances, so you have to map the
 embedded PCPoint instances as embedded-embedded. I'll take a look at whethe
r the existing xml covers t
his case, and if so, it's an annotations issue. If not, then it's a function
ality issue for the spec and should be discussed in its own JIRA issue.


> JDO2 Annotations
> ----------------
>
>                 Key: JDO-403
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-403
>             Project: JDO
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: api2
>    Affects Versions: JDO 2 final
>            Reporter: Andy Jefferson
>            Assignee: Michelle Caisse
>             Fix For: JDO 2 maintenance release 1
>
>         Attachments: embedded.patch, jdo_2_1_annotations.jar
>
>
> It would be desirable for JDO2 to have its own set of annotations. We have
 developed a set within JPOX that would likely serve as a starting point for
 such a set. In my opinion they should be
> 1. Split into javax.jdo.annotations.jdo and javax.jdo.annotations.orm
> 2. Move ORM attributes from some of the JDO annotations and have a ORM annotation.


--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]