[Registry-dev] Minor change to the Registry design

[Sanjiva Weerawarana]

Glen Daniels wrote:
> 
> Honestly, I don't like this for the Java API - it just doesn't feel like 
>  good object design.  Why don't you want the Directory (or Collection, 
> which I agree w/Sanjiva is nicer) class?  Isn't your suggestion like 
> saying "let's have one Fruit class and then we can put isApple(), 
> isOrange(), etc. methods on it"?
> 
> A Directory/Collection ISA special kind of a Resource which has 
> children.  In fact in our model ONLY Collections have children.  Sounds 
> like a perfect case for a subclass to me.  If we leave the separate 
> class, all child-related APIs are contained in the Directory/Collection 
> objects.  If we change it as you propose, these notions bleed 
> (inappropriately, to my eye) into the APIs for *all* Resources and for 
> the whole Registry.
> 
> I would prefer we did not make this change.

Hmmm .. +1 for not changing it now ;-). Glen convinced me that its not a 
bad thing to have. Directory/Collection does extend Resource right? So we 
get all the standard stuff out of it and an additional method to get its 
list of child paths.

Sanjiva.
-- 
Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
email: sanjiva at wso2.com; cell: +94 77 787 6880; fax: +1 509 691 2000

"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform."