On an implementation level, this makes sense. But on an interface level, I prefer individual getters/setters. I see your point mentioned on a different thread: "genman" wrote : | | I think a get/set(boolean) for the NodeSPI is fine. I'm more concerned about the underlying implementation: It's just likely that the set of properties of a node will expand over time. What will inevitably happen is you'll want to add more methods to NodeSPI. The idea is to add some potential for future expansion. | | If you think of the Tree as somewhat modeled off of a file system, the need for meta-data comes up time and time again. Maybe Java annotations can serve this role? But really you need something more dynamic. | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3995358#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...