Hi. Pascal Voitot wrote:

I see in the code that "classical" ORM mapping and "dynamic" EntityMap XML mapping are both used... sometimes for backward compatibility, sometimes as a feature... but this is not easy to understand the exact status...

Tell me if I'm wrong or right: - Class/PropertyClass classical Table mapping is no more the preferred choice no.

- a Class is now directly linked to a Doc and it is created and stored within the Doc... yes

- Class/PropertyClass mapping is now stored by default using XML custommapping in Doc (Class tables are still available with the right option) Class _serialization_ is stored in doc.xWikiClassXML class.custommapping is edited by user. It is just hibernate mapping of objects of this class.

- Object/Property are stored by default in tables using classical ORM but also using EntityMap when the Class has a custommapping yes

So, what is the current and future tendency for all of this? classes in XML and object in tables? something different? I don't know the history of the project but I find the code of XWikiDoc is quite dependent on the chosen mapping of classes, objects etc... Do you intend to introduce an abstraction about the mapping?

custommapping is a feature only. It is needed if you want to store objects in another table with some specific schema. This is useful if you want to access these objects in another app. It is also slightly improve performance.

Finally, a bulk remark: going further, could a XWikiDoc be considered as a class itself? I think no. Doc can contain class. And this class is named the same as doc. But they are different entities.

-- Artem Melentyev