Fwd: Re: Re[2]: [higgins-dev] IdAS Update Proposals

["Jim Sermersheim" <jimse@xxxxxxxxxx>]

inline

>>> "Tom Doman" <TDoman@xxxxxxxxxx> 4/27/07 2:37 PM >>>
>The only one I don't like is proposal 2.  The way objects 
>are extended is confusing and yields calls that make 
>no sense for some cases.  Lists of lists are also possible.

>Of the rest, my preference would be 3, 1, then 4 though 
>I'd be content with any of those.  
 
>I wouldn't mind the approach of 3 extending to anything 
>that applies to only one kind of value, say, even simple and 
>complex, if API differences make sense there.  
 
Do you have an example in mind?
 
>That may not be the case but I like the notion of 
>getting useful, specific functionality based on 
>increasing knowledge of the nature of the object.

Tom
<snip>