Ok, I think I was missing this part in my earlier questions.
So AttributeNode.getType() is going away; got it. Will there be
separate getSubgraphs() and getKeySubgraphs() methods (in addition to
getAttributeNodes()) as mentioned by Gordon?
Still does not clear up my overall confusion of addAttributeNodes when
passed non-basic types in terms of spec-defined behavior.
On Thu 17 Jan 2013 04:43:54 PM CST, Linda DeMichiel wrote:
> Thanks, Gordon.
>
> Folks, I plan to remove AttributeNode.getType(). Yell now if you
> disagree.
>
> -Linda
>
> On 1/17/2013 12:44 PM, Gordon Yorke wrote:
>> Perhaps but they are practically the same thing in this case and I do
>> not see a clear use case for this information
>> especially since there is no way to inspect the related subgraphs of
>> the attribute node. It would be far more helpful to
>> add getSubgraphs() getKeySubgraphs() as a starting point for
>> EntityGraph inspection.
>> --Gordon
>>
>> On 17/01/2013 4:14 PM, Linda DeMichiel wrote:
>>> Hi Gordon,
>>>
>>> On 1/17/2013 12:06 PM, Gordon Yorke wrote:
>>>> Building on Ollie's feedback with respect to BindableType I was
>>>> reviewing AttributeNode.getType() and see this method as
>>>> having very little value and unnecessarily crowds the interface.
>>>> Given the stage we are at with delivering the
>>>> specifiation I suggest we simply remove this method for now and
>>>> provide other methods that add value to the interface in
>>>> the future.
>>>
>>> Would it be useful to simply return the Java type rather than Type?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>