[sdo] [SDO-116]: SDO types should have SDO DataObject Type as base

[Radu Preotiuc-Pietro <radup@bea.com>]

Blaise Doughan [09/Aug/07 05:06 PM] 
I would prefer to leave this issue to SDO 3.0.


Radu Preotiuc [25/Oct/07 05:18 AM] 
In one of the calls a few weeks ago, we discussed this briefly and it
seemed to be a tendency toward specifying that all SDO data object types
derive from DataObject type, but some members needed more time to
consider it. This is a "gentle reminder". 


Blaise Doughan [25/Oct/07 03:59 PM] 
I would still prefer to leave this issue to SDO 3.0.

What are the impacts of making this change?

      * Do the generated static interfaces now need to extend an
        interface for DataObject?
      * Are we ready to commit that the commonj.sdo.DataObject type will
        never have any instance properties?
      * What would the commonj.sdo.DataObject type extend?
      * Does this impact the resolution of SDO-118 (DataObjects
        representing simple types)?


Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.