Reverse attribute mapping..

[Rod Widdowson]

> > Can a bean property (valueMapper) be shorthanded? Or were you just
> > comparing syntaxes there?

It looks as though the p-namespace syntax can only be used for strings, or
references to beans defined elsewhere.   The last would seem to provide
little benefit here.  

I'll note that the documentation deprecates the mixing of p-namespace and
<property> elements.  I do not find it confusing, but I'll take input from
those who know this better than I.

> [...]
> > Also, can a property like that be defaulted? Can we default to
> > StringAttributeValueMapper?

Yes.  I have just checked in an example to do that.

> > Yes, I wouldn't call the property aliases, I'd just call it attributeIDs
> > or some such.
> 
> I'll make that change then.

That too (only I slipped and called it attributeIds - I suspect you'd like
that changed?

> [...]
> > Is there a shorthand for specifying lists?
> 
> I have no idea, but I shall find out and report back.

AFAICS no.  Of course introducing attributeIds as the only way of making the
attribute identifiers known actually makes the bean file slightly more
complicated.

Further feedback?

/Rod